Reactive Case Detection and Treatment and Reactive Drug Administration for Reducing Malaria Transmission: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Many countries pursuing malaria elimination implement "reactive" strategies targeting household members and neighbors of index cases to reduce transmission. These strategies include reactive case detection and treatment (RACDT; testing and treating those positive) and reactive drug administration (RDA; providing antimalarials without testing). We conducted systematic reviews of RACDT and RDA to assess their effect on reducing malaria transmission and gathered evidence about key contextual factors important to their implementation. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full-text records using defined criteria (Patient = those in malaria-endemic/receptive areas; Intervention = RACDT or RDA; Comparison = standard of care; Outcome = malaria incidence/prevalence) and abstracted data for meta-analyses. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to rate certainty of evidence (CoE) for each outcome. Of 1,460 records screened, reviewers identified five RACDT studies (three cluster-randomized controlled trials [cRCTs] and two nonrandomized studies [NRS]) and seven RDA studies (six cRCTs and one NRS); three cRCTs comparing RDA to RACDT were included in both reviews. Compared with RDA, RACDT was associated with nonsignificantly higher parasite prevalence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% CI: 0.96-3.57; one study) and malaria incidence (rate ratio [RR] = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.94-1.79; three studies), both very low CoE. Compared with control or RACDT, RDA was associated with non-significantly lower parasite incidence (RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.36-1.47; 2 studies, moderate CoE), prevalence (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.52-1.17; 4 studies, low CoE), and malaria incidence (RR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.82-1.05; six studies, moderate CoE). Evidence for reactive strategies' impact on malaria transmission is limited, especially for RACDT, but suggests RDA might be more effective.

Development of the Menu Assessment Scoring Tool (MAST) to Assess the Nutritional Quality of Food Service Menus.

Preventing the rise in obesity is a global public health priority. Neighbourhood environments can help or undermine people's efforts to manage their weight, depending on availability of nutritious and nutrient-poor 'discretionary' foods. The proportion of household food budgets spent on eating outside the home is increasing. To inform nutrition policy at a local level, an objective assessment of the nutritional quality of foods and beverages on food service menus that is context-specific is needed. This study describes the development and piloting of the Menu Assessment Scoring Tool (MAST), used to assess the nutritional quality of food service menus in Australia. The MAST is a desk-based tool designed to objectively assess availability of nutrient-poor and absence of nutritious food and beverages on food service menus. A risk assessment approach was applied, using the best available evidence in an iterative way. MAST scores for 30 food service outlets in one Local Government Authority in Perth, Western Australia highlight opportunities for improvements. MAST is the first tool of its kind in Australia to assess the nutritional quality of food service menus. It was practical and feasible to use by public health nutritionists/dietitians and can be adapted to suit other settings or countries.