Back

Prevalence of Falciparum and non-Falciparum Malaria in the 2014-15 Rwanda Demographic Health Survey

Gaither, C.; Morgan, C.; Kirby, R.; Karema, C.; Gashema, P.; White, S.; Topazian, H. M.; Giesbrecht, D. J.; Thwai, K.; Boyter, K.; Munyaneza, T.; Mambo Muvunyi, C.; De Dieu Butera, J.; Bailey, J. A.; Mazarati, J.-B.; Juliano, J. J.

2024-01-10 epidemiology
10.1101/2024.01.09.24301054 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundRecent molecular surveillance suggests an unexpectedly high prevalence of non-falciparum malaria in Africa. Malaria control is also challenged by undetected asymptomatic P. falciparum malaria resulting in an undetectable reservoir for potential transmission. Context-specific surveillance of asymptomatic P. falciparum and non-falciparum species is needed to properly inform malaria control programs. MethodsWe performed quantitative real time PCR for four malaria species in 5,050 primarily adult individuals in Rwanda using the 2014-2015 Demographic Health Survey. We assessed correlates of infection by species to explore attributes associated with each species. Asymptomatic P. ovale spp., P. malariae, and P. falciparum malaria infection had broad spatial distribution across Rwanda. P. vivax infection was rare. ResultsOverall infection prevalence was 22.3% (95%CI [20.3, 24.3]), with P. falciparum and non-falciparum at 16.3% [14.5, 18.1] and 8.0% [6.6, 9.3], respectively. Parasitemias tended to be low and mixed species infections were common, especially where malaria transmission and overall prevalence was the highest. P. falciparum infection was associated with lower wealth, rural residence and low elevation. Fewer factors were significantly associated with non-falciparum malaria. ConclusionsAsymptomatic non-falciparum malaria and P. falciparum malaria are common and widely distributed across Rwanda in adults. Continued molecular monitoring, preferably done by the national malaria control program, of Plasmodium diversity using routine survey samples is needed to strengthen malaria control.

Published in PLOS ONE (predicted rank #4) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.