Cited by 360Malaria Research and ControlMosquito-borne diseases and controlUrban and Rural Development Challenges

The evidence for improving housing to reduce malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Tusting, Lucy S, Ippolito, Matthew M, Willey, Barbara A, Kleinschmidt, Immo, Dorsey, Grant, Gosling, Roly D, Lindsay, Steve W·2015·Malaria Journal

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The global malaria burden has fallen since 2000, sometimes before large-scale vector control programmes were initiated. While long-lasting insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying are highly effective interventions, this study tests the hypothesis that improved housing can reduce malaria by decreasing house entry by malaria mosquitoes. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess whether modern housing is associated with a lower risk of malaria than traditional housing, across all age groups and malaria-endemic settings. Six electronic databases were searched to identify intervention and observational studies published from 1 January, 1900 to 13 December, 2013, measuring the association between house design and malaria. The primary outcome measures were parasite prevalence and incidence of clinical malaria. Crude and adjusted effects were combined in fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses, with sub-group analyses for: overall house type (traditional versus modern housing); screening; main wall, roof and floor materials; eave type; ceilings and elevation. RESULTS: Of 15,526 studies screened, 90 were included in a qualitative synthesis and 53 reported epidemiological outcomes, included in a meta-analysis. Of these, 39 (74%) showed trends towards a lower risk of epidemiological outcomes associated with improved house features. Of studies assessing the relationship between modern housing and malaria infection (n=11) and clinical malaria (n=5), all were observational, with very low to low quality evidence. Residents of modern houses had 47% lower odds of malaria infection compared to traditional houses (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0°53, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0°42-0°67, p< 0°001, five studies) and a 45-65% lower odds of clinical malaria (case-control studies: adjusted OR 0°35, 95 % CI 0°20-0°62, p<0°001, one study; cohort studies: adjusted rate ratio 0°55, 95% CI 0°36-0°84, p=0°005, three studies). Evidence of a high risk of bias was found within studies. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low quality evidence, the direction and consistency of effects indicate that housing is an important risk factor for malaria. Future research should evaluate the protective effect of specific house features and incremental housing improvements associated with socio-economic development.

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 · 10.1186/s12936-015-0724-1

Cites

35 of 35 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

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [17]Ippolito M, Tusting LS, Gosling R, Dorsey G, Lindsay SW. Malaria and housing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO, 2014: CRD42014009048. PMC4460721 26055986
  2. [22]Cochrane Collaboration Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews 2013 Oxford Cochrane Collaboration

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tusting, L. S., Ippolito, M. M., Willey, B. A., Kleinschmidt, I., Dorsey, G., Gosling, R. D., & Lindsay, S. W.
Affiliations
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Durham University (GB)
Corresponding author
Tusting, Lucy S
Venue
Malaria Journal
Published
2015-06-09
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
209-209
ISSN
1475-2875 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1542774706
Cited by
355
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 8
FWCI
4.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Malaria Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1053338)
  • Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development
  • Novartis Foundation
  • Leverhulme Trust
  • Department for International Development
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Science and Technology Directorate
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K012126/1)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (U19AI089674)
  • Fogarty International Center
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
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban and Rural Development Challenges
Keywords
malaria, housing design, modern housing, traditional dwellings, house screening, malaria risk factors, parasite prevalence, clinical malaria incidence, eaves, socio-economic development
MeSH terms
Housing, Humans, Malaria, Mosquito Control, Incidence, Prevalence

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