Abstract
In regions where malaria transmission persists, the implementation of approaches aimed at eliminating parasites from the population can effectively decrease both burden of disease and transmission of infection. Thus, mass strategies that target symptomatic and asymptomatic infections at the same time may help countries to reduce transmission. This systematic review assessed the potential benefits and harms of mass testing and treatment (MTaT) to reduce malaria transmission. Searches were conducted in March 2021 and updated in April 2022 and included cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) as well as nonrandomized studies (NRSs) using malaria infection incidence, clinical malaria incidence, or prevalence as outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane's risk of bias (RoB2) tool and Risk of Bias Tool in Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I), and the certainty of evidence (CoE) was graded for each outcome. Of 4,462 citations identified, seven studies (four cRCTs and three NRSs) contributed outcome data. The analysis revealed that MTaT did not reduce the incidence (risk ratio [RR]: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.87-1.04; 1,181 participants; moderate CoE) or prevalence (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.67-1.01; 7,522 participants; moderate CoE) of malaria infection but resulted in a small reduction in clinical malaria (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70-0.95; 334,944 participants; moderate CoE). Three studies contributing data on contextual factors concluded that MTaT is an acceptable, feasible, and cost-effective intervention. Mathematical modeling analyses (n = 10) suggested that MTaT effectiveness depends on the baseline transmission level, diagnostic test performance, number of rounds, and other co-interventions. Based on the limited evidence available, MTaT has little to no impact on reducing malaria transmission.