Comparison
|
Anopheles species
|
Collection method
|
Mean
|
Risk ratio
|
Lower CL
|
Upper CL
|
P-values
|
---|
MET and ILT
|
An. arabiensis
|
MET
|
8.40
|
0.97
|
0.42
|
2.29
|
0.96
|
ILT
|
13.08
|
Ref
| | | |
An. funestus
|
MET
|
2.68
|
0.51
|
0.24
|
1.11
|
0.09
|
ILT
|
5.28
|
Ref
| | | |
An. coustani
|
MET
|
9.56
|
1.24
|
0.52
|
2.92
|
0.63
|
ILT
|
8.16
|
Ref
| | | |
FTT and ILT
|
An. arabiensis
|
FTT
|
13.64
|
1.36
|
0.73
|
2.56
|
0.33
|
ILT
|
10.00
|
Ref
| | | |
An. funestus
|
FTT
|
6.88
|
0.93
|
0.48
|
1.77
|
0.81
|
ILT
|
7.96
|
Ref
| | | |
An. coustani
|
FTT
|
7.12
|
0.79
|
0.32
|
1.91
|
0.59
|
ILT
|
7.52
|
Ref
| | | |
HDT and ILT
|
An. arabiensis
|
HDT
|
10.24
|
1.25
|
0.65
|
2.40
|
0.50
|
ILT
|
8.44
|
Ref
| | | |
An. funestus
|
HDT
|
1.76
|
0.29
|
0.13
|
0.64
|
0.002
|
ILT
|
6.24
|
Ref
| | | |
An. coustani
|
HDT
|
1.80
|
0.21
|
0.10
|
0.49
|
< 0.001
|
ILT
|
7.68
|
Ref
| | | |
HLC and ILT
|
An. arabiensis
|
HLC
|
1.80
|
0.26
|
0.11
|
0.59
|
0.001
|
ILT
|
6.92
|
Ref
| | | |
An. funestus
|
HLC
|
1.48
|
0.25
|
0.09
|
0.65
|
0.005
|
ILT
|
5.92
|
Ref
| | | |
An. coustani
|
HLC
|
10.52
|
1.24
|
0.54
|
2.90
|
0.60
|
ILT
|
7.16
|
Ref
| | | |
OLT and ILT
|
An. arabiensis
|
OLT
|
3.56
|
0.42
|
0.20
|
0.89
|
0.03
|
ILT
|
8.60
|
Ref
| |
1
|
1
|
An. funestus
|
OLT
|
1.20
|
0.21
|
0.09
|
0.81
|
< 0.001
|
ILT
|
5.76
|
Ref
| | | |
An. coustani
|
OLT
|
23.00
|
3.00
|
1.67
|
5.39
|
< 0.001
|
ILT
|
7.64
|
Ref
| | | |
- The models included terms for collection methods and an interaction term. The risk ratios (RR) were generated by exponentiating the model coefficients