Estimating the burden of imported malaria in the Asia Pacific region: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of Travel Medicine·
- DOI
- 10.1093/jtm/taag022
- PMID
- —
- PMCID
- —
- OpenAlex
- W7149527810
- Study type
- Systematic review
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Article type
- journal-article
- Integrity
- current
Why this research matters now
Imported malaria represents a major barrier to achieving and sustaining malaria elimination in the Asia Pacific region, highlighting the need for strengthened cross-border coordination and tailored interventions.
Structured evidence summary
Research question
The study aimed to quantify the pooled prevalence of imported malaria in Asia Pacific malaria eliminating countries.
Study design
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published between January 2010 and December 2024, covering 22 Asia Pacific malaria eliminating countries. The analysis used inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis and assessed heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias.
Population and setting
The review included 42 studies from nine Asia Pacific countries, encompassing 435,454 malaria cases, with occupational subgroups including laborers and farmers.
Main findings
The pooled prevalence of imported malaria was 89.0 percent. Imported cases were predominantly male (94 percent), caused by Plasmodium falciparum (57 percent), and originated from Africa (64.3 percent). Prevalence varied by elimination phase and country, ranging from 3.2 percent in South Korea to 95 percent in Sri Lanka and China.
Public-health relevance
Imported malaria represents a major barrier to achieving and sustaining malaria elimination in the Asia Pacific region, highlighting the need for strengthened cross-border coordination and tailored interventions.
Important limitations
This summary is limited to the supplied single-article abstract and metadata and requires the original paper for decision-grade interpretation of methodological details, country-specific inclusion criteria, and potential sources of heterogeneity.
GIDS interpretation
This paper was identified through classifier links for malaria, surveillance, and multiple Asia Pacific countries. It provides regional context for understanding imported malaria burden but does not constitute surveillance data or confirm active transmission patterns.
Related GIDS surveillance
Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.
Evidence relationships
This article has 4 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.