Evidence database

Evidence of the effectiveness of anticipation is important for several reasons. Firstly, the selection and design of effective early actions is pivotal for implementation success. Secondly, evidence enables advocates and practitioners to demonstrate the impact of this emerging approach to humanitarian action. Thirdly, sharing and learning from each other’s successes and failures will help the anticipation community maximize its impact. 

This database complements the Early Action Database by collating evidence on the effectiveness of (potential) early actions. Its primary purpose is to help practitioners evaluate and compare early actions based on existing data. As anticipation is a relatively new concept, evidence from anticipatory humanitarian programs may be lacking for many actions. For this reason, to the extent possible, the database also includes evidence from Development, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Humanitarian Response interventions/actions that could be adapted to the anticipatory context (see the implementation context filter). This way, practitioners can still learn from what is known about specific interventions in non-anticipatory contexts.

While the database is primarily meant to inform the selection and design of anticipatory actions, as the evidence specific to anticipation grows, it may also help advocates build arguments for early action, and help Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning experts more easily identify and share studies relevant to their work.

Growing this database is a community effort.  If you know of a study/evidence not reflected in the database, please contact  Arielle Tozier de la Poterie.

After you use the database, please submit your feedback here to help us improve the database’s design and utility in the future.

Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter
Close Filter

Results

52
sort by
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Meet basic needs

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    Households in Bangladesh receiving cash before the flood were more likely to buy food and reinforce their homes. Only seven percent of recipients took no early actions before the flood, as compared to 20 percent in the comparison group. 
    Recipients of cash in Bangladesh spent the money on the following:
    92% spent a portion of their cash grant on food;
    65% used FbF money to pay for health expenses;
    45% bought non-food items (NFIs) such as soap, jerry- cans, buckets or clothing;
    35% spent some FbF cash towards evacuation costs, including boat transport and hiring labor to help move household items or livestock;
    90% reported spending most of the money before the flood peak.

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Save lives

  • Sector(s)

    HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    86 percent of recipient households in Bangladesh evacuated their homes before the flood, as compared to 76 percent in non-intervention communities.

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental
    Focus group discussions
    Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce negative coping strategies, Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    According to survey results (data collected after second flood peak), the majority of Bangladeshi households in intervention and non-intervention groups sold their assets. However, qualitative focus groups (held before a second flood peak) indicated that intervention communities were less likely to have sold assets such as cookstoves and livestock. 

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental
    Focus group discussions
    Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce number/quantity of new loans

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    Households receiving anticipatory assistance were statistically less likley to accrue new debts during and immediately after the flood. 42 percent of Bangladeshi households receiving anticipatory cash took out new loans during or after the flood, as compared to 60 percent of non-recipients. The total value of the loans were also significantly larger among non-beneficiary households. Households who did not receive anticipatory cash were more likely to borrow from banks or moneylenders at high interest rates. 

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Food security/nutrition

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    Survey results from Bangladesh indicate a positive impact on the availabilty of nutritious food during the flood period. Households receiving assistance were less likely to have to eat only rice  (71 percent as comparted to 95 percent) and for a fewer number of days than non-beneficiaries. 

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental
    Focus group discussions
    Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Mental health/well-being

  • Sector(s)

    HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    Households who received anticipatory cash in Bangladesh were statistically less likely to be miserable, unhappy, anxious or depressed in the seven days before the survey. This finding was based on a rudimentary scale, and should therefore not be over interpreted, but was corroborated by focus group data in which non-beneficiaries were more likely to express anxiety. 

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 Households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 FGDs and 16 Key informant interviews.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Household-level effects of providing forecast-based cash in anticipation of extreme weather events: Quasi-experimental evidence from humanitarian interventions in the 2017 floods in Bangladesh (2017)

  • Country / Region

    Bangladesh, Asia

  • Hazard

    Flood

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce health impacts

  • Sector(s)

    HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    There was no statistically significant difference in illness between intervention and comparison groups in Bangladesh following the flood.

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1039 households

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Quasi-experimental; Focus group discussions; Key informant interviews

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    Small sample size: 410 households total. 16 focus group discussions and 16 Key informant interviews. Cash was distributed between 3 and 7 days before the flood peak.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

  • Country / Region

    Asia, Mongolia

  • Hazard

    Dzud

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash, Animal care kits

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce negative coping strategies, Reduce number/value of new loans, Prevent loss of assets

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    The study found that both anticiaptory programs and the emergency response were effective in preventing vulnerable herder households from making destituion sales of valuable assets. Beneficiaries of MRCS anticipatory action were 17% less likely to engage in this behavior and FAO beneficiaries were 43% less likely (than the control group). Beneficiaries of MRCS response were 20% less likely than the control group. Those receiving anticipatory aid from MRCS sold 8% more sheep, suggesting either increased destitution sales or proactive sales before expected price decreases. 

    MRCS beneficiaries were also more likely to forego consumption. 

    Beneficiary groups borrowed at the same rate as the control groups, but those receiving anticipatory cash from MRCS borrowed an average of $USD 132 less than others (nearly 60% of the value of the cash transfer).

    Beneficiaries of MRCS response aid had food consumption scores 3.5 point higher than the control group, while FAO beneficiares of early action were 3 points below. 

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Inverse probability weighting regression
    Propensity score matching (PSM)
    Quasi-experimental

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Monitoring report

  • Year of publication

    2021

  • Additional details

    This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event. 

    The study used the following sample sizes:

    • 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site; 
    • 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site; 
    • 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.  
    • 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance. 

    MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

  • Country / Region

    Asia, Mongolia

  • Hazard

    Dzud

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash, Animal care kits

  • Action purpose(s)

    Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. 

    FAO anticipatory actions reduced the number of animals in poor health by nearly 7%, whereas MRCS' early actions increased the number of animals with deteriorating health by 7%. The analysis found no difference in the mortality of sheep compared to the control group. MRCS early actions increased offspring survival by 5%, but no impact was found for FAO early actions. 

    Both groups of anticipatory action beneficiaries produced less cashmere than the control group (4kg less on average for MRCS and 8Kg less on average for FAO). MRCS beneficiaries reported obtaining prices up to 2% higher for their cashmere than other groups.

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Inverse probability weighting regression
    Propensity score matching (PSM)
    Quasi-experimental

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Monitoring report

  • Year of publication

    2021

  • Additional details

    This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event. 
    The study used the following sample sizes:

    • 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site; 
    • 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site; 
    • 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.  
    • 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance. 

    MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Impacts of forecast-based financing on herder households protecting from the dzud in Mongolia (2020)

  • Country / Region

    Asia, Mongolia

  • Hazard

    Dzud

  • Early action

    Unconditional cash, Animal care kits

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce negative coping strategies, Reduce number/value of new loans, Prevent loss of income/livelihood/livestock, Prevent loss of assets

  • Implementation context

    Anticipatory Action

  • What the evidence says

    This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. 

    The study calculated the following benefit-cost ratios for these three interventions:

    • 1.05 for MRCS
    • 1.26 for FAO 
    • 1.71 for DREF. 

    This means that for every US dollar invested by in anticiaption or response by MRCS and FAO beneficiary households received a benefit of US$ 1.05, US$ 1.26, and US$ 1.71. The survey did not collect any data on the amount of milk produced, therefore the current benefit estimates could not include income from milk. These estimates were stable in sensitivity analyses (best and worst case scenario simulation) with an exception for MRCS.

  • Number of direct beneficiaries

    1000 MRCS anticipatory action; 450 total for FAO anticipatory action; 1750 total for MRCS response

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Return on Investment

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Monitoring report

  • Year of publication

    2021

  • Additional details

    This study compared the impact of anticipatory actions taken separately by Mongolia Red Cross Society (MRCS) and FAO to MRCS emergency response and a control group who received no aid. The Mongolian Red Cross Society (MRCS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) triggered their FbF/AA mechanisms in January 2020 to anticipate and mitigate dzud impacts that year. Both agencies delivered unconditional cash grants (approx $84 from MRCS and $96 from FAO) and animal care kits to 1,450 of the most vulnerable herders across a total of 12 provinces and 83 soums. There were differences between the animal care kits distributed by each organization. See the full report for details. In addition, MRCS mounted an emergency response in March 2020, providing an additional l 1,750 households with the same bundle of cash and animal cares kits as distributed before the event. 
    The study used the following sample sizes:

    • 202 households (of 1000 total) for MRCS intervention site; 
    • 150 households (of 450 total) for the FAO intervention site; 
    • 201 households (of 1750 total) for the DREF intervention site.  
    • 201 control households, which were similarly vulnerable and dzud-affected households but did not receive any FbF assistance. 

    MRCS beneficiaries received approximately USD 84 before (January) or after (mid-March) the event. FAO households received USD 96 before the event (early March)

Study Title

Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Indoor residual spraying

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    One trial found that indoor residual spraying appeared to be more protective than bed nets in areas where malaria is endemic, occurring over many months/years. In areas where malaria transmission is unstable (less frequent, and therefore the population is less likely to have developed immunity), insecticide-treated nets appear to be more protective than indoor residual spraying.

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Cluster randomized controlled trials
    Controlled before‐and‐after studies
    Interrupted time series

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2010

  • Read the study
Study Title

Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria in communities using insecticide‐treated nets

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Insecticide-treated bed nets, Indoor residual spraying

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    A systematic review comparing the use of a combination of indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated nets with insecticide-treated nets alone found mixed/inconclusive evidence as to whether indoor residual spraying is better than using insecticide treated nets alone (Choi et al. 2019).

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Cluster randomized controlled trials
    Controlled before‐and‐after studies
    Interrupted time series

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Additional details

    The study recommends additional research to evaluate the added benefit of indoor residual spraying in communities using bed nets. 

  • Read the study
Study Title

Insecticide space spraying for preventing malaria transmission

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    External spraying

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    Space spraying refers to the outdoor application of chemicals to kills mosquitoes. Only the adult mosquito population is targeted with space spraying, not the juvenile stages. This review evaluated the space spraying for malaria prevention at a population level (rather than a household level as is done with indoor residual spraying) and impacts on the vector population. It compared space spraying on its own or in combination with other control measures to doing nothing. The evidence from the four studies identified is low quality and inconclusive. The authors note that space spraying is expensive to implement on a routine basis as it requires specific equipment and experienced staff. 

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Cluster‐randomized controlled trials
    Interrupted time series
    Randomized cross‐over studies
    Controlled before‐and‐after

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2018

  • Additional details

    The authors suggest additional research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this measure. 

  • Read the study
Study Title

Insecticide-treated bed nets and curtains for preventing malaria (Review)

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Insecticide-treated bed nets

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    In the wider international cooperation setting, insecticide-treated bed nets are highly effective in reducing childhood morbidity and mortality from malaria. 

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Randomized controlled trials

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2009

  • Additional details

    The review examined fourteen cluster RCTs and eight individual RCTs.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Insecticide‐treated nets for preventing malaria in pregnancy

  • Country / Region

    Asia, Africa, India

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Insecticide-treated bed nets

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    The use of insecticide-treated nets during pregnancy improves pregnancy outcomes in malaria-endemic regions of Africa.

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    RCT

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2006

  • Additional details

    Reviewed 5 RCTs, four in Africa one in Asia, on the use of insecticide-treated nets to prevent malaria during pregnancy. The authors' conclude that "ITNs have a beneficial impact on pregnancy outcome in malaria-endemic regions of Africa when used by communities or by individual women. No further trials of ITNs in pregnancy are required in sub-Saharan Africa. Further evaluation of the potential impact of ITNs is required in areas with less intense and Plasmodium vivax transmission in Asia and Latin America"(p. 2).

  • Read study here
Study Title

Is There Persistence in the Impact of Emergency Food Aid? Evidence on Consumption, Food Security, and Assets in Rural Ethiopia

  • Country / Region

    Africa, Ethopia

  • Hazard

    Drought

  • Early action

    Food-for-work, Food

  • Action purpose(s)

    Food security/nutrition

  • Sector(s)

    HEALTH, NUTRITION

  • Implementation context

    Emergency Response

  • What the evidence says

    For-for-work beneficiaries had higher food consumption and food security scores, especially  those with greater per-capita expenditures. They were also less likely to invest in livestock holdings and perceived their risk of famine to be lower. Food distributions had the greatest impact on poorer households, increasing food consumption but also increasing perceived risk of famine.

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Propensity score matching
    Difference-in-difference
    Quasi-experimental

  • Study type

    Impact assessment

  • Publication Type

    Other non-peer reviewed publication

  • Year of publication

    2006

  • Additional details

    Sample of 1327 households

  • Read the study
Study Title

Larvicide to prevent malaria transmission

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Larvicide

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    A systematic review of 4 existing studies found that ground application of larvicide may help to reduce incidence of malaria. There are no studies covering aerial application.

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Randomized controlled trials
    Interrupted time series
    Randomized cross‐over studies
    Non‐randomized cross‐over studies
    Controlled before‐and‐after studies

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2019

  • Read the study
Study Title

Mapping the impacts of food aid: Current knowledge and future directions

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    Various

  • Early action

    Food

  • Action purpose(s)

    Food security/nutrition

  • Sector(s)

    FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

  • Implementation context

    Emergency Response

  • What the evidence says

    Substantial evidence demonstrates that food aid in development and emergency contexts does increase food consumption, does not appear to create dependency or provide a disincentive to work.

  • Research approach

    Mixed-methods

  • Research methods

    Literature Review

  • Study type

    Literature review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2012

  • Additional details

    Evidence on food vs. cash and food aid and conflict was less conclusive, therefore the authors recommend additional study.

  • Read the study
Study Title

Mosquito larval source management for controlling malaria

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Clearing drainage systems

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    Larval source management was shown to be effective in Sri Lanka, India, the Philippines, Greece, Kenya, and Tanzania. The interventions tested included adding larvicide to abandoned mine pits, streams, irrigation ditches and rice paddies where mosquitos breed, and building dams, flushing streams, and removing water containers from around people’s homes.
    This review of 13 studies did not identify any studies including habitat manipulation in advance of a flood (e.g. clearing drains or emptying open containers with water). This does not mean that such activities are not effective, but as there have been no studies, there is no systematic evidence to support it.  
    One existing systematic review did not identify any studies including habitat manipulation in advance of a flood (e.g. clearing drains or emptying open containers with water). This does not mean that such activities are not effective, but as there have been no studies, there is no systematic evidence to support it.  

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    RCT, Randomized cross-over trial, Controlled before-and-after trials

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2013

  • Additional details

    Reviewed 13 studies. Authors concluded: "Where larval habitats are not too extensive and a sufficient proportion of these habitats can be targeted, LSM probably reduces the number of people that will develop malaria (moderate quality evidence), and probably reduces the proportion of the population infected with the malaria parasite at any one time (moderate quality evidence)...In one study from The Gambia where mosquitos were breeding in large swamps and rice paddies, spraying swamps with larvicide using ground teams did not show any benefit."

  • Read the study
Study Title

Mosquito repellents for malaria prevention

  • Country / Region

    Various

  • Hazard

    N/A

  • Early action

    Insect repellent

  • Action purpose(s)

    Reduce vector borne diseases

  • Sector(s)

    WASH, HEALTH

  • Implementation context

    Development/DRR programs

  • What the evidence says

    This review showed insufficient evidence to conclude that topical repellents can prevent malaria. Daily application of the repellents was a challenge with the study participants in the included studies. Insect-repellent clothing may reduce the risk of malaria if bed nets are not available. 

  • Research approach

    Quantitative

  • Research methods

    Randomized controlled trials
    Cluster randomized controlled trials

  • Study type

    Systematic review

  • Publication Type

    Peer reviewed journal

  • Year of publication

    2018

  • Additional details

    The study examined a total of 10 trials studying topical repellents in combination with nets and alone. 

  • Read the study

The evidence database is still under development and is subject to change based on feedback and input from our partners.


Do you have a question?

Growing this database is a community effort. If you know of a study/evidence not reflected in the database, please feel free to contact me.

Arielle Tozier de la Poterie

Global advisor Early Action and Research

German Red Cross

Raise your Question

 

Teaser image by Musfarayani/IFRC