ArticleBMC medicine2025
Evaluating a novel multi-species vector control tool for humanitarian crises: the efficacy of attractive targeted sugar baits among forcibly displaced populations in Northern Nigeria.
Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArmed conflicts, natural disasters and forced population displacement have escalated dramatically since the 1990s. By mid-2024, the total number of people driven from their homes, often surviving in very harsh conditions for years, reached 122.6 million globally. In emergencies characterised by flimsy shelters, food insecurity, inadequate sanitation, poor access to health services and increased exposure to blood-feeding insects, diseases such as malaria, dengue and leishmaniasis cause high levels of morbidity and mortality. Conventional vector control interventions are inadequate in these settings due to operational and biological limitations. Novel vector control tools which are lightweight, easy to use and effective against multiple vector species are urgently needed to protect displaced populations.
methodsWe conducted a 6-month, 2-arm community field trial in two internally displaced people camps in Maiduguri, Nigeria, to evaluate the entomological efficacy of attractive targeted sugar baits (ATSB). Monthly entomological monitoring measured changes in adult and immature vector density. Intervention acceptability was assessed using focus group discussions and a cross-sectional survey. To investigate environmental drivers of vector abundance, which might influence field outcomes, a hybrid approach of unsupervised and supervised machine learning regression models was developed using composite demographic, bioclimatic and ecological remote sensing data.
resultsATSB demonstrated a significant impact on indoor female Anopheles gambiae s.l. density (IRR: 0.140 [95% CI: 0.093-0.212]; p < 0.0001) and indoor blood-fed An. gambiae s.l. density (IRR: 0.0193 [95% credible interval: 0.0111-0.0356]). ATSB also significantly reduced indoor blood-fed Aedes aegypti (IRR: 0.0746 [95% credible intervals: 0.00884-0.502]). More than 97% of camp residents showed high levels of acceptance for ATSB, including willingness to pay. The strongest environmental predictors of An. gambiae s.l. occurrence were composite indices of vegetation water content, soil moisture, moist canopy, landcover diversity, urbanisation and normalised and enhanced vegetation index which together contributed to 73.5% of the final model.
conclusionsField trial findings strongly support the use of ATSB to control sympatric malaria and dengue vector populations in humanitarian crises. Remote sensing analysis identified key drivers of An. gambiae s.l. occurrence providing a high-resolution environmental profile where ATSB achieved an entomological impact against multiple vector species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.