Skip to main content
. 2017 Aug 18;12(8):e0180845. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180845

Table 2. Characteristics of individuals screened for malaria in case and control neighborhoods by RDT and LAMP.

Number (%)
Index-case households
(N = 116)
Neighbors of case households2 (N = 225) Control households (N = 286) p-value3
Number individuals1 801 1,055 1,295 -
RDT positive 11 (1.4) 7 (0.7) 5 (0.4) 0.03
LAMP positive 27 (3.4) 15 (1.4) 5 (0.4) <0.0001
Sub-patent4 21 (2.6) 14 (1.3) 5 (0.4) <0.0001
Gender Female 376 (46.9) 634 (60.1) 730 (56.4) <0.0001
Male 425 (53.1) 421 (39.9) 565 (43.6)
Age category (years) <5 108 (13.5) 181 (17.2) 214 (16.5) <0.0001
5–14 187 (23.3) 324 (30.7) 405 (31.3)
15–24 289 (36.1) 226 (21.4) 209 (16.1)
25–34 83 (10.4) 99 (9.4) 121 (9.3)
35–44 54 (6.7) 66 (6.3) 101 (7.8)
45+ 76 (9.5) 152 (14.4) 211 (16.3)
Missing 4 (0.5) 7 (0.7) 34 (2.6)
Reported fever 30 (3.7) 62 (5.9) 100 (7.7) 0.003
Missing 0 (0.0) 2 (0.2) 4 (0.3)
Season Low 127 (15.9) 255 (24.2) 645 (49.8) <0.0001
High 674 (84.1) 800 (75.8) 650 (50.2)
Travelled to Angola 33 (4.1) 24 (2.3) 14 (1.1) <0.0001
Used a bednet 153 (19.1) 294 (27.9) 298 (23.0) <0.0001
Missing 9 (1.1) 7 (0.7) 12 (0.9)
House sprayed 202 (25.2) 304 (28.8) 426 (32.9) 0.01
Missing 57 (7.1) 15 (1.4) 9 (0.7)

RDT: rapid diagnostic test; LAMP: loop mediated isothermal amplification

1Excluding index cases

2 Engela only

3 Pearson's Chi-squared test

4 RDT negative and LAMP positive