Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThompson, John
dc.contributor.authorTusting, Lucy S
dc.contributor.authorWilley, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorLucas, Henry
dc.contributor.authorKafy, Hmooda T
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Richard
dc.contributor.authorLindsay, Steve W
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-14T12:58:20Z
dc.date.available2014-04-14T12:58:20Z
dc.date.issued2013-06-19
dc.identifier.citationTusting, Lucy S., et al. "Socioeconomic development as an intervention against malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis." The Lancet 382.9896 (2013): 963-972.en_GB
dc.identifier.issn2379-0353
dc.identifier.urihttps://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/3784
dc.description.abstractBackground Future progress in tacking malaria mortality will probably be hampered by the development of resistance to drugs and insecticides and by the contraction of aid budgets. Historically, control was often achieved without malariaspecific interventions. Our aim was to assess whether socioeconomic development can contribute to malaria control. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether the risk of malaria in children aged 0–15 years is associated with socioeconomic status. We searched Medline, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Campbell Library, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Health Systems Evidence, and the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre evidence library for studies published in English between Jan 1, 1980, and July 12, 2011, that measured socioeconomic status and parasitologically confirmed malaria or clinical malaria in children. Unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were combined in fixedeffects and random-effects meta-analyses, with a subgroup analysis for different measures of socioeconomic status. We used funnel plots and Egger’s linear regression to test for publication bias. Findings Of 4696 studies reviewed, 20 met the criteria for inclusion in the qualitative analysis, and 15 of these reported the necessary data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The odds of malaria infection were higher in the poorest children than in the least poor children (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1∙66, 95% CI 1∙35–2∙05, p<0∙001, I²=68%; adjusted OR 2∙06, 1∙42–2∙97, p<0∙001, I²=63%), an effect that was consistent across subgroups.Interpretation Although we would not recommend discontinuation of existing malaria control efforts, we believe that increased investment in interventions to support socioeconomic development is warranted, since such interventions could prove highly effective and sustainable against malaria in the long term.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipDFIDen_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.rightsNOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in The Lancet. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in The Lancet 382.9896 (2013) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60851-Xen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://www.ids.ac.uk/files/dmfile/IDSOpenDocsStandardTermsOfUse.pdfen_GB
dc.subjectEconomic Developmenten_GB
dc.subjectHealthen_GB
dc.titleSocioeconomic development as an intervention against malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysisen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.rights.holderThe Lancet (Elsevier)en_GB
dc.identifier.externalurihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60851-Xen_GB
dc.identifier.teamKnowledge Technology and Societyen_GB


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record