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