↓ Skip to main content

The challenges of introducing routine G6PD testing into radical cure: a workshop report

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The challenges of introducing routine G6PD testing into radical cure: a workshop report
Published in
Malaria Journal, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0896-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedikt Ley, Nick Luter, Fe Esperanza Espino, Angela Devine, Michael Kalnoky, Yoel Lubell, Kamala Thriemer, J. Kevin Baird, Eugenie Poirot, Nolwenn Conan, Chong Chee Kheong, Lek Dysoley, Wasif Ali Khan, April G. Dion-Berboso, Germana Bancone, Jimee Hwang, Ritu Kumar, Ric N. Price, Lorenz von Seidlein, Gonzalo J. Domingo

Abstract

The only currently available drug that effectively removes malaria hypnozoites from the human host is primaquine. The use of 8-aminoquinolines is hampered by haemolytic side effects in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficient individuals. Recently a number of qualitative and a quantitative rapid diagnostic test (RDT) format have been developed that provide an alternative to the current standard G6PD activity assays. The WHO has recently recommended routine testing of G6PD status prior to primaquine radical cure whenever possible. A workshop was held in the Philippines in early 2015 to discuss key challenges and knowledge gaps that hinder the introduction of routine G6PD testing. Two point-of-care (PoC) test formats for the measurement of G6PD activity are currently available: qualitative tests comparable to malaria RDT as well as biosensors that provide a quantitative reading. Qualitative G6PD PoC tests provide a binomial test result, are easy to use and some products are comparable in price to the widely used fluorescent spot test. Qualitative test results can accurately classify hemizygous males, heterozygous females, but may misclassify females with intermediate G6PD activity. Biosensors provide a more complex quantitative readout and are better suited to identify heterozygous females. While associated with higher costs per sample tested biosensors have the potential for broader use in other scenarios where knowledge of G6PD activity is relevant as well. The introduction of routine G6PD testing is associated with additional costs on top of routine treatment that will vary by setting and will need to be assessed prior to test introduction. Reliable G6PD PoC tests have the potential to play an essential role in future malaria elimination programmes, however require an improved understanding on how to best integrate routine G6PD testing into different health settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 115 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 24 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 29 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2019.
All research outputs
#5,545,599
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,391
of 5,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,684
of 274,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#21
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,569 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.