T/ treatment threshold tT were calculated using the formulas:Results Estimate of the Treatment or Decision ThresholdHarm expressed as mortality. If harm were considered only in terms of health outcome 
(mortality due to disease and treatment, respectively), applying Equation 3 to data on children, the value of DT would be:tczFP ?Tb t TP 
?(Db{Tb)zFP ?Tband :??tTTN ?Tb{tc FN ?Dbz(TP{FP) ?Tb??DTWhere: tc = test cost; FP = false positive rate (or 1-specificity); TP = true positive rate (or sensitivity); Tb = treatment burden ( = Tmort * Lc); Db = disease burden ( = Dmort * Lc).Tmort 0:0001 0:003 Dmort 0:A calculated threshold in terms of mortality only, would be as low as 0.003, or 0.3 .Malaria Decision ThresholdApplying the same equation to data on adults: DT Tmort 0:0001 0:071 Dmort 0:For adults, a calculated threshold in terms of mortality only, would be 0.071, or 7.1 . Harm expressed as mortality plus cost. If costs are incorporated, using the highest limit of the range of value of a death Oltipraz averted for children (applying Equation 4) the decision threshold will be: DT TczTmort ?Lc 1z3150 ?0:0001 0:011 Dmort ?Lc 3150 ?0:threshold, both with and without considering costs. With the K162 site alternative regimen, the test was no more an option, and the disease probability was much lower than the decision threshold. Finally, for adults in the rainy season the probability of malariaattributable fever was 25.1 , that is, between the test and the test/ treatment threshold without considering costs, while if costs were considered the test was not an option and the disease probability was lower than the decision threshold. With the alternative regimen of amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, considering costs, the test was no more an option and the probability would be higher than the decision threshold. The relations between the pre-test probabilities and the thresholds are summarized in Figure 5. In order to further illustrate the main results, four real case scenarios from the field studies are presented below. Clinical management will be first considered without a test, then with the availability of a RDT for malaria.A threshold based on the higher value assigned to a death averted for malaria treatment in children is therefore 1.1 . If the lower value of a death averted is used, then the threshold would rise to 5.4 (calculations not shown). For adults, at the higher value assigned to a death averted, the calculated threshold level would be 52.5 (calculation shown in Results S1). At the lower value, the whole cost of a treatment with ACT outweighs the benefits even at a 100 level of certainty. Using for adults the alternative regimen of amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, the threshold would be 0.103 (or 10.3 ) at the higher value of a death averted (calculation shown in Results S1), and 0.262 (or 26.2 ) at the lower value (calculation not shown). All the calculations hereafter will be based on the higher value.Illustrative casesCase 1. At the end of May (end of the dry season) a 2-year-old boy is taken to a rural dispensary in the province of Banfora, Burkina Faso. He has got fever (38.5uC at the moment of consultation), the mother reports that he has been febrile for two days, has vomited twice and has a dry cough, no other significant clinical findings. Considering the local guidelines for presumptive management, without a test the nurse should treat for malaria any febrile case. In the dry season, the proportion of all fev.T/ treatment threshold tT were calculated using the formulas:Results Estimate of the Treatment or Decision ThresholdHarm expressed as mortality. If harm were considered only in terms of health outcome (mortality due to disease and treatment, respectively), applying Equation 3 to data on children, the value of DT would be:tczFP ?Tb t TP ?(Db{Tb)zFP ?Tband :??tTTN ?Tb{tc FN ?Dbz(TP{FP) ?Tb??DTWhere: tc = test cost; FP = false positive rate (or 1-specificity); TP = true positive rate (or sensitivity); Tb = treatment burden ( = Tmort * Lc); Db = disease burden ( = Dmort * Lc).Tmort 0:0001 0:003 Dmort 0:A calculated threshold in terms of mortality only, would be as low as 0.003, or 0.3 .Malaria Decision ThresholdApplying the same equation to data on adults: DT Tmort 0:0001 0:071 Dmort 0:For adults, a calculated threshold in terms of mortality only, would be 0.071, or 7.1 . Harm expressed as mortality plus cost. If costs are incorporated, using the highest limit of the range of value of a death averted for children (applying Equation 4) the decision threshold will be: DT TczTmort ?Lc 1z3150 ?0:0001 0:011 Dmort ?Lc 3150 ?0:threshold, both with and without considering costs. With the alternative regimen, the test was no more an option, and the disease probability was much lower than the decision threshold. Finally, for adults in the rainy season the probability of malariaattributable fever was 25.1 , that is, between the test and the test/ treatment threshold without considering costs, while if costs were considered the test was not an option and the disease probability was lower than the decision threshold. With the alternative regimen of amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, considering costs, the test was no more an option and the probability would be higher than the decision threshold. The relations between the pre-test probabilities and the thresholds are summarized in Figure 5. In order to further illustrate the main results, four real case scenarios from the field studies are presented below. Clinical management will be first considered without a test, then with the availability of a RDT for malaria.A threshold based on the higher value assigned to a death averted for malaria treatment in children is therefore 1.1 . If the lower value of a death averted is used, then the threshold would rise to 5.4 (calculations not shown). For adults, at the higher value assigned to a death averted, the calculated threshold level would be 52.5 (calculation shown in Results S1). At the lower value, the whole cost of a treatment with ACT outweighs the benefits even at a 100 level of certainty. Using for adults the alternative regimen of amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, the threshold would be 0.103 (or 10.3 ) at the higher value of a death averted (calculation shown in Results S1), and 0.262 (or 26.2 ) at the lower value (calculation not shown). All the calculations hereafter will be based on the higher value.Illustrative casesCase 1. At the end of May (end of the dry season) a 2-year-old boy is taken to a rural dispensary in the province of Banfora, Burkina Faso. He has got fever (38.5uC at the moment of consultation), the mother reports that he has been febrile for two days, has vomited twice and has a dry cough, no other significant clinical findings. Considering the local guidelines for presumptive management, without a test the nurse should treat for malaria any febrile case. In the dry season, the proportion of all fev.