Background Concern that insecticide resistant mosquitoes are threatening malaria control has driven the development of new types of insecticide treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) of insecticide. Malaria control programmes have a choice of vector control interventions although it is unclear which controls should be used to combat the disease. The study aimed at producing a framework to easily compare the public health impact and costeffectiveness of different malaria prevention measures currently in widespread use. Methods We used published data from experimental hut trials conducted across Africa to characterise the entomological effect of pyrethroid-only ITNs versus ITNs combining a pyrethroid insecticide with the synergist piperonyl butoxide (PBO). We use these estimates to parameterise a dynamic mathematical model of Plasmodium falciparum malaria which is validated for two sites by comparing simulated results to empirical data from randomised control trials (RCTs) in Tanzania and Uganda. We extrapolated model simulations for a series of potential scenarios likely across the sub-Saharan African region and include results in an online tool (Malaria INtervention Tool [MINT]) that aims to identify optimum vector control intervention packages for scenarios with varying budget, price, entomological and epidemiological factors.Findings Our model indicates that switching from pyrethroid-only to pyrethroid-PBO ITNs could averted up to twice as many cases, although the additional benefit is highly variable and depends on the setting conditions. We project that annual delivery of long-lasting, non-pyrethroid IRS would prevent substantially more cases over 3-years, while pyrethroid-PBO ITNs tend to be the most cost-effective intervention per case averted. The model was able to predict prevalence and efficacy against prevalence in both RCTs for the intervention types tested. MINT is applicable to regions of sub-Saharan Africa with endemic malaria and provides users with a method of designing intervention packages given their setting and budget.Interpretation The most cost-effective vector control package will vary locally. Models able to recreate results of RCTs can be used to extrapolate outcomes elsewhere to support evidence-based decision making for investment in vector control.

No abstract

This paper reviews existing modularity and modularization literature within manufacturing operations. Its purpose is to examine the tools, techniques, and concepts relating to modular production, to draw together key issues currently dominating the literature, to assess managerial implications associated with the emerging modular paradigm, and to present an agenda for future research directions. The review is based on journal papers included in the ABI/Inform electronic database and other noteworthy research published as part of significant research programmes. The research methodology concerns reviewing existing literature to identify key modular concepts, to determine modular developments, and to present a review of significant contributions to the field. The findings indicate that the modular paradigm is being adopted in a number of manufacturing organizations. As a result a range of conceptual tools, techniques, and frameworks has emerged and the field of modular enquiry is in the process of codifying the modular lexicon and developing appropriate modular strategies commensurate with the needs of manufacturers. Modular strategies and modular architecture were identified as two key issues currently dominating the modular landscape. Based on this review, the present authors suggest that future research areas need to focus on the development and subsequent standardization of interface protocols, cross-brand module use, supply chain power, transparency, and trust. This is the first review of the modular landscape and as such provides insights into, first, the development of modularization and, second, issues relating to designing modular products and modular supply chains.

No abstract

ISO 15288 and the INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook define technical (and other) processes but do not really explain why we need all of them. This paper formalizes the technical processes specifically in terms of the changes in maturity that each enacts and why these particular changes are necessary. This in turn clarifies the need for each process and places the processes on a sound philosophical footing.