Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of Burkina Faso and Ghana study populations

From: Antibody levels against GLURP R2, MSP1 block 2 hybrid and AS202.11 and the risk of malaria in children living in hyperendemic (Burkina Faso) and hypo-endemic (Ghana) areas

Characteristics Burkina Faso Ghana
N Cumulative incidence (95 % CI)a Child-months at risk Malaria cases Rate per 100 child-months (95 % CI)b N Cumulative incidence (95 %CI)a Child-months at risk Malaria cases Rate per 100 child-months (95 % CI)c
Age group (months)
 6–23 99 83.7 % (75.7, 90.2) 1071.2 191 17.8 (15.9, 19.7) 16 43.8 % (23.8, 70.5) 152.7 7 4.6 (2.2, 9.6)
 24–35 87 82.5 % (73.7, 89.7) 947.0 176 18.6 (16.6, 20.6) 54 5.6 % (1.8, 16.2) 509.8 3 0.6 (0.2, 1.8)
 36–47 90 69.7 % (60, 78.8) 982.0 120 12.2 (10, 14.4) 54 5.6 % (1.8, 16.2) 510.8 3 0.6 (0.2, 1.8)
 48–72 78 42.4 % (32.3, 54.2) 851.0 52 6.1 (3.8, 8.4) 85 5.9 % (2.5, 13.6) 802.1 6 0.7 (0.3, 1.7)
Baseline parasitaemia status
 Negative 132 82.6 % (75.7, 88.5) 1432.9 249 17.4 (15.8, 19) 203 8.9 % (5.7, 13.7) 1919.0 19 1.0 (0.6, 1.6)
 Positive 219 63.8 % (57.4, 70.2) 2386.5 288 12.1 (10.6, 13.6) 6 0 % 0 0
GLURP R2 IgG serological status
 Non-responder 230 80 % (74.6, 84.9) 2499.5 404 16.2 (14.9, 17.4) 167 9 % (5.5, 14.5) 1577.0 16 1.0 (0.6, 1.7)
 Responder 124 52.6 % (44, 61.7) 1351.7 135 10 (7.9, 12.1) 42 7 % (2.4, 20.5) 398.3 3 0.8 (0.2, 2.3)
MSP1 hybrid IgG serological status
 Non-responder 272 75.1 % (69.8, 80.2) 2953.8 448 15.2 (13.9, 16.4) 166 8.4 % (5.1, 13.8) 1567.7 15 1.0 (0.6, 1.6)
 Responder 82 56.1 % (45.8, 67) 897.4 91 10.1 (7.7, 12.6) 43 9.3 % (3.6, 22.9) 407.6 4 1.0 (0.4, 2.6)
AS202.11 IgG serological status
 Non-responder 313 71 % (65.9, 75.9) 3406.2 486 14.3 (13.1, 15.5) 184 9.2 % (5.9, 14.4) 1738.5 18 1.0 (0.7, 1.6)
 Responder 41 68.1 % (53.4, 81.9) 444.9 53 11.9 (9, 14.8) 25 4 % (0.6, 25.2) 236.8 1 0.4 (0.1, 3.0)
Total 354 70.7 % (65.8, 75.3) 3851.2 539 14 (12.9, 15.1) 209 8.6 % (5.5, 13.3) 1975.3 19 1.0 (0.6, 1.5)
  1. N number of children
  2. aCumulative incidence and 95 % CI was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method
  3. b95 % CI was calculated using the method by Stukel et al., [32]
  4. c95 % CI was calculated using standard method for rate; there was only one multiple episode