Cited by 40Mosquito-borne diseases and controlDengue and Mosquito Control ResearchMalaria Research and Control

Cost-Effectiveness of a Community-Based Approach Intertwined with a Vertical Aedes Control Program

Open access
Baly, Alberto, Toledo, Maria Eugenia, Vanlerberghe, Veerle, Ceballos, Enrique, Reyes, Alicia, Sanchez, Idalmis, Carvajal, Marinelli, Maso, Rizel +4 more·2009·The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Abstract

We compared in a 5-year intervention study the cost-effectiveness of community-based environmental management intertwined with routine vertical Aedes control and of routine vertical control only. At baseline (year 2000), Aedes infestation levels and economic costs for vector control were comparable in intervention and control areas (house index, 2.23% versus 2.21% and US$21 versus US$24/yr/inhabitant, respectively). By 2004, house indices became 0.22% versus 2.36% and the costs were 29.8 US$ versus 36.7 US$/yr/inhabitant, respectively. The community cost made up 38.6% of the total economic cost in 2004 in the intervention areas against 23.5% in 2000. The average cost-effectiveness ratio for the intervention period 2001–2004, expressed as the societal cost incurred for the reduction (from baseline) of Aedes foci, was US$831.1 per focus in the intervention areas versus US$2,465.6 in the control areas. The intervention produced economic savings and health benefits that were sustained over the whole observation period.

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 · 10.4269/ajtmh.2009.81.88

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • A number of randomised controlled studies have demonstrated significant impacts on vector indices, even though the methods of intervention varied considerably between the studies.

    “A number of randomised controlled studies have demonstrated significant impacts on vector indices [47, 48, 73, 83, 101](Fig 5) even though the methods of intervention varied considerably between the studies.”

    From Is Dengue Vector Control Deficient in Effectiveness or Evidence?: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2016) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Discussion explicitly says, “our study was not a randomized community trial,” contrary to its inclusion among randomized controlled studies. The Abstract and Effectiveness section report reductions in Aedes infestation and foci, but those findings do not make this a randomized study. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Community-based environmental management significantly reduced the House Index (MD = -2.14; 95% CI -3.72, -0.56).

    “Community-based environmental management significantly reduced the House Index: MD = -2.14 (95% CI -3.72, -0.56) [48] (S4 Fig)”

    From Is Dengue Vector Control Deficient in Effectiveness or Evidence?: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2016) · cites this paper as [48]

    Table 3 (page unavailable) reports a 2004 House Index of 0.22% in the intervention areas versus 2.36% in the control areas, a difference of -2.14 percentage points, with P < 0.001. The paper does not report the claimed 95% confidence interval (-3.72, -0.56). The intervention also combined community-based management with routine vertical Aedes control, rather than using community management alone. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nineteen of the included studies provided sufficient data for inclusion in meta-analyses.

    “Forty-one studies were included in the review [45–85] (S1 Table), nineteen of which reported sufficient data for inclusion in meta-analyses [46–48, 52, 54, 55, 58, 59, 66, 69, 73, 74, 76, 77, 80–83, 85].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baly, A., Toledo, M. E., Vanlerberghe, V., Ceballos, E., Reyes, A., Sanchez, I., Carvajal, M., Maso, R., La Rosa, M., Denis, O., Boelaert, M., & Van der Stuyft, P.
Affiliations
  • Instituto de Medicina Tropical “Pedro Kourí” (CU)
  • Instituto de Medicina Tropical “Pedro Kourí,” Department of Epidemiology, La Habana, Cuba; Institute of Tropical Medicine, Epidemiology and Disease Control Unit, Department of Public Health, Antwerp, Belgium; Provincial Unit of Surveillance and Vector Control, Santiago de Cuba, Cuba; Instituto de Medicina Tropical “Pedro Kourí,” Department of Economics, La Habana, Cuba
Corresponding author
Baly, Alberto
Venue
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Published
2009-07
Volume
81
Issue
1
Pages
88-93
ISSN
0002-9637 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2131257352
Cited by
40
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mosquito-borne diseases and control
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Dengue and Mosquito Control Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Malaria Research and Control
Keywords
community-based environmental management, house index, mosquito breeding sites, cost-effectiveness ratio, community participation, vector-borne disease prevention
MeSH terms
Aedes, Animals, Community Health Services, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Costs and Cost Analysis, Mosquito Control

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