Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Dec 18;23(1):376.
doi: 10.1186/s12936-024-05191-8.

Comparison of fine-scale malaria strata derived from population survey data collected using RDTs, microscopy and qPCR in South-Eastern Tanzania

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of fine-scale malaria strata derived from population survey data collected using RDTs, microscopy and qPCR in South-Eastern Tanzania

Issa H Mshani et al. Malar J. .

Abstract

Background: Malaria-endemic countries are increasingly adopting data-driven risk stratification, often at district or higher regional levels, to guide their intervention strategies. The data typically comes from population-level surveys collected by rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), which unfortunately perform poorly in low transmission settings. Here, a high-resolution survey of Plasmodium falciparum prevalence rate (PfPR) was conducted in two Tanzanian districts using rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), microscopy, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assays, enabling the comparison of fine-scale strata derived from these different diagnostic methods.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 35 villages in Ulanga and Kilombero districts, south-eastern Tanzania between 2022 and 2023. A total of 7,628 individuals were screened using RDTs (SD-BIOLINE) and microscopy, with two thirds of the samples further analysed by qPCR. The data was used to categorize each district and village as having very low (PfPR < 1%), low (1%≤PfPR < 5%), moderate (5%≤PfPR < 30%), or high (PfPR ≥ 30%) parasite prevalence. A generalized linear mixed model was used to analyse infection risk factors. Other metrics, including positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, parasite densities, and Kappa statistics were computed for RDTs or microscopy and compared to qPCR as reference.

Results: Significant fine-scale variations in malaria risk were observed within and between the districts, with village prevalence ranging from 0% to > 50%. Prevalence varied by testing method: Kilombero was low risk by RDTs (PfPR = 3%) and microscopy (PfPR = 2%) but moderate by qPCR (PfPR = 9%); Ulanga was high risk by RDTs (PfPR = 39%) and qPCR (PfPR = 54%) but moderate by microscopy (PfPR = 26%). RDTs and microscopy classified majority of the 35 villages as very low to low risk (18-21 villages). In contrast, qPCR classified most villages as moderate to high risk (29 villages). Using qPCR as the reference, PPV for RDTs and microscopy ranged from as low as < 20% in very low transmission villages to > 80% in moderate and high transmission villages. Sensitivity was 62% for RDTs and 41% for microscopy; specificity was 93% and 96%, respectively. Kappa values were 0.7 for RDTs and 0.5 for microscopy. School-age children (5-15 years) had higher malaria prevalence and parasite densities than adults (P < 0.001). High-prevalence villages also had higher parasite densities (Spearman r = 0.77, P < 0.001 for qPCR; r = 0.55, P = 0.003 for microscopy).

Conclusion: This study highlights significant fine-scale variability in malaria burden within and between the study districts and emphasizes the variable performance of the testing methods when stratifying risk at local scales. While RDTs and microscopy were effective in high-transmission areas, they performed poorly in low-transmission settings; and classified most villages as very low or low risk. In contrast, qPCR classified most villages as moderate or high risk. The findings emphasize that, where precise mapping and effective targeting of malaria are required in localized settings, tests must be both operationally feasible and highly sensitive. Furthermore, when planning microstratification efforts to guide local control measures, it is crucial to carefully consider both the strengths and limitations of the available data and the testing methods employed.

Keywords: Fine scale stratifications; Malaria; Malaria screening; Micro-stratification; Microscopy; Polymerase chain reaction (PCR); Population surveys; Prevalence rate; Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This work was approved under Ifakara Health Institute Review Board (Ref: IHI/IRB/No: 1 2021) and the National Institute for Medical Research-NIMR (NIMR/HQ/R.8a/Vol. 1X/3735). Permission to publish this work has been granted with reference No: BD. 242/437/01 C/6. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study villages in Kilombero and Ulanga districts, south-eastern Tanzania
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schematic representation of the study sampling procedures
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Fine-scale malaria mapping of 35 surveyed villages in the Ulanga and Kilombero districts using qPCR, RDTs, and microscopy data is shown in the top panel. The bottom panel indicates malaria risk generated by interpolating prevalence data obtained for each surveyed village by qPCR, RDTs, and microscopy. Categories defined based on calculated prevalence rates as either very low risk (PfPR < 1%), low risk (1% ≤ PfPR < 5%), moderate risk (5% ≤ PfPR < 30%), or high risk (PfPR ≥ 30%) (total number of villages = 35)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Percentage of villages categorized by different testing methods as either very low risk (PfPR < 1%), low risk (1% ≤ PfPR < 5%), moderate risk (5% ≤ PfPR < 30%), or high risk (PfPR ≥ 30%) (Total number of villages = 35)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The Venn diagram illustrates positive samples detected exclusively by a specific tool while the other two missed them (qPCR only: 594 positive, RDT only: 171 positive, Microscopy only: 84 positive). Additionally, it shows intersections indicating positive detection by two tools when one detects negative (qPCR & RDT: 415 positive; qPCR & Microscopy: 56 positive; RDT & Microscopy: 56 positive). It also indicates intersections where all tools detect positive samples (qPCR, RDT, & Microscopy: 647 positive)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Estimates of the positive predictive values (PPVs) of RDTs and microscopy at different malaria endemicities across the study villages, defined based on either qPCR-derived strata (A) or RDT-derived strata (B). Panel C illustrates the trend in sensitivity of both RDTs and microscopy across age groups. The shaded area represents the 95% confidence interval. Panel D displays the detection probability of both RDTs and microscopy relative to parasite density estimated by qPCR
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Geometric mean parasite densities per age group estimated by A qPCR and B microscopy. C (density estimated by qPCR) and D (density estimated by microscopy) show the correlation between parasite density and prevalence estimates by qPCR. E (density estimated by qPCR) and F (density estimated by microscopy) show the correlation between parasite density and prevalence estimates by RDTs

Similar articles

References

    1. WHO. Malaria policy advisory group (MPAG) meeting report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023.
    1. Thawer SG, Chacky F, Runge M, Reaves E, Mandike R, Lazaro S, et al. Sub-national stratification of malaria risk in mainland Tanzania: a simplified assembly of survey and routine data. Malar J. 2020;19:177. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mategula D, Mitambo C, Sheahan W, Masingi Mbeye N, Gumbo A, Kwizombe C, et al. Malaria burden stratification in Malawi—a report of a consultative workshop to inform the 2023–2030 Malawi malaria strategic plan. Wellcome Open Res. 2023;8:178. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Djaskano MI, Cissoko M, Diar MSI, Israel DK, Clément KH, Ali AM, et al. Stratification and adaptation of malaria control interventions in Chad. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2023;8:450. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cissoko M, Magassa M, Sanogo V, Ouologuem A, Sangaré L, Diarra M, et al. Stratification at the health district level for targeting malaria control interventions in Mali. Sci Rep. 2022;12:8271. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources