Skip to main content

Table 2 Estimates of a negative binomial regression for the comparison of outdoor host-seeking anopheline density between HDNT and HBLT in Ahero and Iguhu, western Kenya

From: Evaluation of human-baited double net trap and human-odour-baited CDC light trap for outdoor host-seeking malaria vector surveillance in Kenya and Ethiopia

Site and species

Traps

Number collected

EMM (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

p value

Ahero

 An. arabiensis

HDNT

6188

148.83 (109.67–201.97)

3.43 (2.22–5.30)

< 0.001*

HBLT

1862

43.40 (31.90–59.04)

1.0a

 

 An. funestus s.l.

HDNT

392

9.21 (6.67–12.71)

3.24 (1.99–5.25)

< 0.001*

HBLT

137

2.84 (1.99–4.06)

1.0a

 

 An. pharoensis

HDNT

1386

32.91 (24.09–44.96)

1.36 (0.87–2.13)

0.183

HBLT

1016

24.25 (17.72–33.19)

1.0a

 

 An. coustani

HDNT

895

21.30 (15.59–29.11)

3.55 (2.25–5.61)

< 0.001*

HBLT

252

6.00 (4.32–8.34)

1.0a

 

Iguhu

 An. gambiae s.l.

HDNT

92

2.17 (1.50–3.13)

1.29 (0.75–2.20)

0.353

HBLT

70

1.68 (1.14–2.47)

1.0a

 

 An. funestus s.l.

HDNT

34

0.81 (0.52–1.27)

1.42 (0.72–2.79)

0.308

HBLT

24

0.57 (0.35–0.94)

1.0a

 

 An. pharoensis

HDNT

6

0.13 (0.05–0.32)

1.45 (0.38–5.58)

0.587

HBLT

4

0.09 (0.03–0.26)

1.0a

 

 An. coustani

HDNT

38

0.86 (0.55–1.34)

1.65 (0.83–3.27)

0.151

HBLT

22

0.52 (0.31–0.87)

1.0a

 

Total anophelines

HDNT

9031

108.69 (87.54–134.96)

2.75 (2.01–3.74)

< 0.001*

HBLT

3387

39.60 (31.84–49.25)

1.0a

 
  1. A total of 42 trap-nights were conducted for each trap in each study site
  2. HBLT human-odour-baited CDC light trap, HDNT human-baited double net trap, EMM estimated marginal mean density, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval
  3. * Statistically significant
  4. aReference value