↓ Skip to main content

Expanding access to parasite-based malaria diagnosis through retail drug shops in Tanzania: evidence from a randomized trial and implications for treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
Expanding access to parasite-based malaria diagnosis through retail drug shops in Tanzania: evidence from a randomized trial and implications for treatment
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1658-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen Maloney, Abigail Ward, Bonnie Krenz, Nora Petty, Lindsay Bryson, Caitlin Dolkart, Theodoor Visser, Arnaud Le Menach, Valerie K. Scott, Justin M. Cohen, Esther Mtumbuka, Sigsbert Mkude

Abstract

Tanzania has seen a reduction in the fraction of fevers caused by malaria, likely due in part to scale-up of control measures. While national guidelines require parasite-based diagnosis prior to treatment, it is estimated that more than half of suspected malaria treatment-seeking in Tanzania initiates in the private retail sector, where diagnosis by malaria rapid diagnostic test (RDT) or microscopy is illegal. This pilot study investigated whether the introduction of RDTs into Accredited Drug Dispensing Outlets (ADDOs) under realistic market conditions would improve case management practices. Dispensers from ADDOs in two intervention districts in Tanzania were trained to stock and perform RDTs and monitored quarterly. Each district was assigned a different recommended retail price to evaluate the need for a subsidy. Malaria RDT and artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) uptake and availability were measured pre-intervention and 1 year post-intervention through structured surveys of ADDO owners and exiting customers in both intervention districts and one contiguous control district. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression were used to compare the three districts and identify predictive variables for testing. A total of 310 dispensers from 262 ADDOs were trained to stock and perform RDTs. RDT availability in intervention ADDOs increased from 1% (n = 172) to 73% (n = 163) during the study; ACT medicines were available in 75% of 260 pre-intervention and 68% of 254 post-intervention ADDOs. Pre-treatment testing performed within the ADDO increased from 0 to 65% of suspected malaria patients who visited a shop (95% CI 60.8-69.6%) with no difference between intervention districts. Overall parasite-based diagnosis increased from 19 to 74% in intervention districts and from 3 to 18% in the control district. Prior knowledge of RDT availability (aOR = 1.9, p = 0.03) and RDT experience (aOR = 1.9, p = 0.01) were predictors for testing. Adherence data indicated that 75% of malaria positives received ACT, while 3% of negatives received ACT. Trained and supervised ADDO dispensers in rural Tanzania performed and sold RDTs under real market conditions to two-thirds of suspected malaria patients during this one-year pilot. These results support the hypothesis that introducing RDTs into regulated private retail sector settings can improve malaria testing and treatment practices without an RDT subsidy. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN14115509.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 91 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 22%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 7 8%
Lecturer 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 26 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 29 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 11 August 2021.
All research outputs
#2,127,195
of 25,271,884 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#394
of 5,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,487
of 433,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#9
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,271,884 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,888 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 433,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.