Access to healthcare is a requirement for human well-being that is constrained, in part, by the allocation of healthcare resources relative to the geographically dispersed human population 1-3 . Quantifying access to care globally is challenging due to the absence of a comprehensive database of healthcare facilities. We harness major data collection efforts underway by OpenStreetMap, Google Maps and academic researchers to compile the most complete collection of facility locations to date. Leveraging the geographically variable strengths of our facility datasets, we use an established methodology 4 to characterize travel time to healthcare facilities in unprecedented detail. We produce maps of travel time with and without access to motorized transport, thus characterizing travel time to healthcare for populations distributed across the wealth spectrum. We find that just 8.9% of the global population (646 million people) cannot reach healthcare within one hour if they have access to motorized transport, and that 43.3% (3.16 billion people) cannot reach a healthcare facility by foot within one hour. Our maps highlight an additional vulnerability faced by poorer individuals in remote areas and can help to estimate whether individuals will seek healthcare when it is needed, as well as providing an evidence base for efficiently distributing limited healthcare and transportation resources to underserved populations both now and in the future.Access to healthcare is a measure of human well-being that is constrained by numerous geographically varying factors 1-3 , the most immediate of which is the time it takes individuals to travel to a properly equipped and adequately staffed healthcare facility. Due to spatial clustering of healthcare facilities in densely populated areas, individuals living in rural regions often face increased travel times and thus cost when seeking healthcare. This situation can be exacerbated by poor transportation infrastructure and lack of motorized transport, which further increase the time required for travel and could disproportionally affect lower-income populations. As such, people facing long travel times to healthcare facilities are less likely to seek care when it is needed [5][6][7][8][9] , and the consequences of failing to seek care include increased mortality and morbidity from treatable conditions 10,11 .

Malaria transmission is influenced by climate, land use and deliberate intervention. Recent declines have been observed in malaria transmission. Here, we show that the continent has witnessed a long-term recession in the prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum since 1900-29 (40%) to 2010-15 (24%), interrupted at different times by periods of rapidly increasing and decreasing transmission. The cycles and trend over the last 115 years are inconsistent with simplistic explanations in terms of climate or intervention alone. Previous global initiatives had minor impacts on malaria transmission, and a historically unprecedented decline has been observed since 2000. However, there has been little change to the continued high transmission belt covering large parts of West and Central Africa. Previous efforts to model the changing patterns of P. falciparum transmission intensity in Africa have been limited to the last 15 years1,2, or have used maps of historical expert opinion3. We provide quantitative data comprising 50,424 surveys at 36,966 geocoded locations to cover 115 years of malaria history in sub-Saharan Africa.

Background Substantial progress has been made in reducing the burden of malaria in Africa since 2000, but those gains could be jeopardised if the COVID-19 pandemic affects the availability of key malaria control interventions. The aim of this study was to evaluate plausible effects on malaria incidence and mortality under different levels of disruption to malaria control. Methods Using an established set of spatiotemporal Bayesian geostatistical models, we generated geospatial estimates across malaria-endemic African countries of the clinical case incidence and mortality of malaria, incorporating an updated database of parasite rate surveys, insecticide-treated net (ITN) coverage, and effective treatment rates. We established a baseline estimate for the anticipated malaria burden in Africa in the absence of COVID-19-related disruptions, and repeated the analysis for nine hypothetical scenarios in which effective treatment with an antimalarial drug and distribution of ITNs (both through routine channels and mass campaigns) were reduced to varying extents. Findings We estimated 215·2 (95% uncertainty interval 143·7–311·6) million cases and 386·4 (307·8–497·8) thousand deaths across malaria-endemic African countries in 2020 in our baseline scenario of undisrupted intervention coverage. With greater reductions in access to effective antimalarial drug treatment, our model predicted increasing numbers of cases and deaths: 224·1 (148·7–326·8) million cases and 487·9 (385·3–634·6) thousand deaths with a 25% reduction in antimalarial drug coverage; 233·1 (153·7–342·5) million cases and 597·4 (468·0–784·4) thousand deaths with a 50% reduction; and 242·3 (158·7–358·8) million cases and 715·2 (556·4–947·9) thousand deaths with a 75% reduction. Halting planned 2020 ITN mass distribution campaigns and reducing routine ITN distributions by 25%–75% also increased malaria burden to a total of 230·5 (151·6–343·3) million cases and 411·7 (322·8–545·5) thousand deaths with a 25% reduction; 232·8 (152·3–345·9) million cases and 415·5 (324·3–549·4) thousand deaths with a 50% reduction; and 234·0 (152·9–348·4) million cases and 417·6 (325·5–553·1) thousand deaths with a 75% reduction. When ITN coverage and antimalarial drug coverage were synchronously reduced, malaria burden increased to 240·5 (156·5–358·2) million cases and 520·9 (404·1–691·9) thousand deaths with a 25% reduction; 251·0 (162·2–377·0) million cases and 640·2 (492·0–856·7) thousand deaths with a 50% reduction; and 261·6 (167·7–396·8) million cases and 768·6 (586·1–1038·7) thousand deaths with a 75% reduction. Interpretation Under pessimistic scenarios, COVID-19-related disruption to malaria control in Africa could almost double malaria mortality in 2020, and potentially lead to even greater increases in subsequent years. To avoid a reversal of two decades of progress against malaria, averting this public health disaster must remain an integrated priority alongside th...

Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are one of the most widespread and impactful malaria interventions in Africa, yet a spatially-resolved time series of ITN coverage has never been published. Using data from multiple sources, we generate high-resolution maps of ITN access, use, and nets-per-capita annually from 2000 to 2020 across the 40 highest-burden African countries. Our findings support several existing hypotheses: that use is high among those with access, that nets are discarded more quickly than official policy presumes, and that effectively distributing nets grows more difficult as coverage increases. The primary driving factors behind these findings are most likely strong cultural and social messaging around the importance of net use, low physical net durability, and a mixture of inherent commodity distribution challenges and less-than-optimal net allocation policies, respectively. These results can inform both policy decisions and downstream malaria analyses.