Skip to main content

Table 4 Intervention effectiveness on dengue vector control of studies in meta-analysis

From: Assessing the effects of interventions for Aedes aegypti control: systematic review and meta-analysis of cluster randomised controlled trials

First author & year

Time to impact measurement (months)

Intervention type

Parameters

Intervention clusters

Control clusters

Intervention effectiveness (RD and 95%CI)

Kroeger (2006)

Mexico 9

Venezuela 12

Chemical control

HI

CI

BI

0.09

0.01

0.11

0.12

0.02

0.14

-0.03 (−0.06; 0.00)

−0.01 (−0.02; 0.00)

−0.03 (−0.06; 0.00)

Lenhart (2008)

5

Chemical control

HI

CI

BI

0.05

0.02

0.06

0.03

0.01

0.03

0.02 (−0.01; 0.05)

0.01 (0.00; 0.19)

0.03 (0.00; 0.06)

Ocampo (2009)

15

Chemical control

HI

0.00

0.05

−0.05 (−0.10; 0.00)

Vanlerberghe (2013)

12

Chemical control

HI

CI

BI

0.14

0.66

0.22

0.19

0.55

0.24

−0.05 (−0.09; −0.01)

0.11 (−0.04; 0.19)

−0.02 (−0.06; 0.02)

Quintero (2015)

8

Chemical control

HI

CI

BI

0.07

0.02

0.07

0.03

0.01

0.03

0.04 (0.02; 0.07)

0.01 (0.00; 0.02)

0.04 (0.02; 0.07)

Kittayapong (2012)

8

Biological control

HI

CI

BI

0.12

0.03

0.25

0.14

0.05

0.33

−0.02 (−0.07; 0.03)

−0.02 (−0.04; −0.01)

−0.08 (−0.15; −0.01)

Vanlerberghe (2009)

12

Community participation

HI

BI

0.26

0.28

0.48

0.52

−0.22 (−0.23; −0.21)

−0.24 (−0.25; −0.23)

Arunachalam (2012)

18

Community participation

HI

CI

BI

0.04

0.01

0.04

0.16

0.06

0.21

−0.12 (−0.15; −0.09)

−0.05 (−0.06; −0.04)

−0.17 (−0.20; −0.14)

Basso (2015)

6

Community participation

HI

CI

BI

0.07

0.07

0.12

0.07

0.08

0.14

0.00 (−0.03; 0.03)

0.00 (−0.03; 0.02)

−0.01 (−0.06; 0.03)

Andersson (2015)

Nicaragua 32

Mexico 32

Community participation

HI

CI

BI

0.14

0.05

0.20

0.20

0.08

0.30

−0.06 (−0.07; −0.05)

−0.03 (−0.03; −0.02)

−0.10 (−0.12; −0.09)

  1. HI = household index; CI = container index; BI = Breteau index