- aThe surveillance tools included in each surveillance category were: human landing catch; CDC light trap (included CDC light traps with or without lights or lures including placement near an occupied bed net); Human-baited traps (included host decoy traps, odour baited entry traps, Ifakara tent traps, the Flavela tent trap), and electrocuting grids near humans; Animal-baited trap (included animal baited net traps, animal baited hut traps, Magoon stable traps, and barrier fences around animals); other fan traps (included UV light traps, updraft traps, the BG-Suna trap and the BG-Sentinel trap)
- bThe entomological outputs assessed each tool as a function of the numbers of entomological indicators monitored by surveillance tool category and effectiveness. For “range of indicators”, a green square indicates the tool monitored almost all indicators in Table 1 while a yellow square indicated the tool was useful for monitoring a moderate number of the indicators in Table 1. A tool’s “effectiveness” was defined as a function of the numbers of specimens and/or species collected with green squares indicating that the tool was efficient in collecting adequate numbers of samples across a range of species while yellow squares indicated the tool collected fewer specimens or did not collect all anthropophagic species
- cGreen squares indicate that expert informants considered this tool to be advantageous in not requiring a lot of human input for establishing or maintaining, was inexpensive, easy to use and required minimal supplies or were easily accessible for “labour”, “cost”, “ease of use” (limited training required) and “supplies”, respectively. Yellow squares indicated either a range of informant opinions as to operational utility. Red squares indicate that the tool had major limitations: high costs, was labor intensive or hard to use
