首页> 外文OA文献 >Applications and Limitations of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Miniature Light Traps for Measuring Biting Densities of African Malaria Vector Populations: A Pooled-Analysis of 13 Comparisons with Human Landing Catches.
【2h】

Applications and Limitations of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Miniature Light Traps for Measuring Biting Densities of African Malaria Vector Populations: A Pooled-Analysis of 13 Comparisons with Human Landing Catches.

机译:疾病控制和预防微型光阱中心在非洲疟疾媒介种群咬密度测量中的应用与局限性:与人类着陆点的13种比较的汇总分析。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Measurement of densities of host-seeking malaria vectors is important for estimating levels of disease transmission, for appropriately allocating interventions, and for quantifying their impact. The gold standard for estimating mosquito-human contact rates is the human landing catch (HLC), where human volunteers catch mosquitoes that land on their exposed body parts. This approach necessitates exposure to potentially infectious mosquitoes, and is very labour intensive. There are several safer and less labour-intensive methods, with Centers for Disease Control light traps (LT) placed indoors near occupied bed nets being the most widely used. This paper presents analyses of 13 studies with paired mosquito collections of LT and HLC to evaluate these methods for their consistency in sampling indoor-feeding mosquitoes belonging to the two major taxa of malaria vectors across Africa, the Anopheles gambiae sensu lato complex and the Anopheles funestus s.l. group. Both overall and study-specific sampling efficiencies of LT compared with HLC were computed, and regression methods that allow for the substantial variations in mosquito counts made by either method were used to test whether the sampling efficacy varies with mosquito density. Generally, LT were able to collect similar numbers of mosquitoes to the HLC indoors, although the relative sampling efficacy, measured by the ratio of LT:HLC varied considerably between studies. The overall best estimate for An. gambiae s.l. was 1.06 (95% credible interval: 0.68-1.64) and for An. funestus s.l. was 1.37 (0.70-2.68). Local calibration exercises are not reproducible, since only in a few studies did LT sample proportionally to HLC, and there was no geographical pattern or consistent trend with average density in the tendency for LT to either under- or over-sample. LT are a crude tool at best, but are relatively easy to deploy on a large scale. Spatial and temporal variation in mosquito densities and human malaria transmission exposure span several orders of magnitude, compared to which the inconsistencies of LT are relatively small. LT, therefore, remain an invaluable and safe alternative to HLC for measuring indoor malaria transmission exposure in Africa.
机译:寻求宿主的疟疾传播媒介密度的测量对于估计疾病传播水平,适当分配干预措施以及量化其影响非常重要。估计蚊子与人的接触率的金标准是人为着陆捕获物(HLC),人类志愿者在其中捕获着陆在裸露的身体部位上的蚊子。这种方法需要暴露于潜在的传染性蚊子,并且劳动强度大。有几种更安全且劳动强度较低的方法,其中使用最广泛的方法是将疾病控制中心的光阱(LT)放在室内靠近被占领的蚊帐的地方。本文介绍了13项与LT和HLC的成对蚊子收集有关的研究的分析,以评估这些方法在抽样非洲范围内两个主要疟疾媒介群冈比亚按蚊和按蚊按蚊的室内喂养蚊子时的一致性。 sl组。计算了LT与HLC相比的总体和研究特定采样效率,并使用允许通过这两种方法产生的蚊子计数发生实质性变化的回归方法来测试采样效率是否随蚊密度的变化而变化。通常,尽管在两次研究之间,通过LT:HLC的比值衡量的相对采样效率差异很大,但LT能够收集到室内HLC数量相似的蚊子。 An的整体最佳估算。冈比亚有限公司是1.06(95%可信区间:0.68-1.64)和An。 Funestus s.l.为1.37(0.70-2.68)。局部校准工作不可重现,因为仅在少数研究中LT样本与HLC成比例,并且在LT样本过低或过高的趋势中,没有地理模式或平均密度的一致趋势。 LT充其量只是一个粗糙的工具,但是相对来说,大规模部署比较容易。蚊虫密度和人类疟疾传播暴露的时空变化跨越几个数量级,而相比之下,LT的不一致性相对较小。因此,LT仍然是HLC衡量非洲室内疟疾传播暴露的宝贵且安全的替代方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号