Cited by 293Malaria Research and ControlMosquito-borne diseases and controlBird parasitology and diseases

Effect of two different house screening interventions on exposure to malaria vectors and on anaemia in children in The Gambia: a randomised controlled trial

Open access
Kirby, Matthew J, Ameh, David, Bottomley, Christian, Green, Clare, Jawara, Musa, Milligan, Paul J, Snell, Paul C, Conway, David J +1 more·2009·The Lancet

Abstract

Background House screening should protect people against malaria. We assessed whether two types of house screening--full screening of windows, doors, and closing eaves, or installation of screened ceilings--could reduce house entry of malaria vectors and frequency of anaemia in children in an area of seasonal malaria transmission.Methods During 2006 and 2007, 500 occupied houses in and near Farafenni town in The Gambia, an area with low use of insecticide-treated bednets, were randomly assigned to receive full screening, screened ceilings, or no screening (control). Randomisation was done by computer-generated list, in permuted blocks of five houses in the ratio 2:2:1. Screening was not treated with insecticide. Exposure to mosquitoes indoors was assessed by fortnightly light trap collections during the transmission season. Primary endpoints included the number of female Anopheles gambiae sensu lato mosquitoes collected per trap per night. Secondary endpoints included frequency of anaemia (haemoglobin concentration <80 g/L) and parasitaemia at the end of the transmission season in children (aged 6 months to 10 years) who were living in the study houses. Analysis was by modified intention to treat (ITT), including all randomised houses for which there were some outcome data and all children from those houses who were sampled for haemoglobin and parasitaemia. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN51184253.Findings 462 houses were included in the modified ITT analysis (full screening, n=188; screened ceilings, n=178; control, n=96). The mean number of A gambiae caught in houses without screening was 37.5 per trap per night (95% CI 31.6-43.3), compared with 15.2 (12.9-17.4) in houses with full screening (ratio of means 0.41, 95% CI 0.31-0.54; p<0.0001) and 19.1 (16.1-22.1) in houses with screened ceilings (ratio 0.53, 0.40-0.70; p<0.0001). 755 children completed the study, of whom 731 had complete clinical and covariate data and were used in the analysis of clinical outcomes. 30 (19%) of 158 children from control houses had anaemia, compared with 38 (12%) of 309 from houses with full screening (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.97; p=0.04), and 31 (12%) of 264 from houses with screened ceilings (OR 0.51, 0.27-0.96; p=0.04). Frequency of parasitaemia did not differ between intervention and control groups.Interpretation House screening substantially reduced the number of mosquitoes inside houses and could contribute to prevention of anaemia in children.Funding Medical Research Council.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60871-0

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [20]Clarke S Variation in malaria risk and response in rural Gambia PhD thesis 2001 University of Copenhagen Copenhagen

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirby, M. J., Ameh, D., Bottomley, C., Green, C., Jawara, M., Milligan, P. J., Snell, P. C., Conway, D. J., & Lindsay, S. W.
Affiliations
  • Durham University (GB)
  • MRC Unit the Gambia (GM)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Lindsay, Steve W
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-09
Volume
374
Issue
9694
Pages
998-1009
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2108348528
Cited by
293
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 17
FWCI
13.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Malaria Research and Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mosquito-borne diseases and control
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Bird parasitology and diseases
Keywords
house screening, Anopheles gambiae, childhood anemia, seasonal malaria transmission, parasitemia, insecticide-treated bednets, Gambia, vector control, child health
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Anemia, Animals, Anopheles, Bedding and Linens, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Gambia, Hemoglobins, Housing, Humans, Insecticides, Interior Design and Furnishings, Male, Morbidity, Mosquito Control, Population Surveillance, Residence Characteristics, Logistic Models, Malaria, Falciparum, Principal Component Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review