↓ Skip to main content

Optimal price subsidies for appropriate malaria testing and treatment behaviour

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Optimal price subsidies for appropriate malaria testing and treatment behaviour
Published in
Malaria Journal, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1582-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristian Schultz Hansen, Tine Hjernø Lesner, Lars Peter Østerdal

Abstract

Malaria continues to be a serious public health problem particularly in Africa. Many people infected with malaria do not access effective treatment due to high price. At the same time many individuals receiving malaria drugs do not suffer from malaria because of the common practice of presumptive diagnosis. A global subsidy on artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) has recently been suggested to increase access to the most effective malaria treatment. Following the recommendation by World Health Organization that parasitological testing should be performed before treatment and ACT prescribed to confirmed cases only, it is investigated in this paper if a subsidy on malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) should be incorporated. A model is developed consisting of a representative individual with fever suspected to be malaria, seeking care at a specialized drug shop where RDTs, ACT medicines, and cheap, less effective anti-malarials are sold. Assuming that the individual has certain beliefs of the accuracy of the RDT and the probability that the fever is malaria, the model predicts the diagnosis-treatment behaviour of the individual. Subsidies on RDTs and ACT are introduced to incentivize appropriate behaviour: choose an RDT before treatment and purchase ACT only if the test is positive. Solving the model numerically suggests that a combined subsidy on both RDT and ACT is cost minimizing and improves diagnosis-treatment behaviour of individuals. For certain beliefs, such as low trust in RDT accuracy and strong belief that a fever is malaria, subsidization is not sufficient to incentivize appropriate behaviour. A combined subsidy on both RDT and ACT rather than a single subsidy is likely required to improve diagnosis-treatment behaviour among individuals seeking care for malaria in the private sector.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 23%
Student > Master 6 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 20%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 17%
Engineering 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 5 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 November 2016.
All research outputs
#3,532,542
of 8,686,406 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,443
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,911
of 240,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#32
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,686,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 59th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 240,228 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.