Submitted by the MVCAC VVBD Committee
Abdi AA, et al. (2026) PLoS Negl Trop Dis 20(1): e0013914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pntd.0013914
Author summary: Many studies evaluate Aedes aegypti mosquito vector control approaches, but only a subset are published. One possible contributor to selective reporting, or publication bias, is the presence of a conflict of interest (COI), such as employment by the company conducting the trial or a financial conflict tied to intellectual property. We conducted a systematic review of field trials of Ae. aegypti control from 2010-2022 and examined whether studies in which authors disclose a COI report higher vector suppression than studies declaring no COI. Among 51 studies that met inclusion criteria, those with declared COI reported greater Ae. aegypti reduction of 56.7% compared to 34.5% from studies that declared no COI. We also observed that COI statements are not consistently published across journals. These findings suggest potential publication bias and underscore the need for consistent, transparent COI disclosure policies to strengthen credibility and interpretation of vector control evidence.
Note: This paper reviews published and presumably peer reviewed studies and not presentations at meetings or other events. There is a big difference between carefully reviewed evaluations and ‘infomercials’. There is a need to standardized protocols that will allow careful comparisons among different trials done at different places.