↓ Skip to main content

Global survey of malaria rapid diagnostic test (RDT) sales, procurement and lot verification practices: assessing the use of the WHO–FIND Malaria RDT Evaluation Programme (2011–2014)

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Global survey of malaria rapid diagnostic test (RDT) sales, procurement and lot verification practices: assessing the use of the WHO–FIND Malaria RDT Evaluation Programme (2011–2014)
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-1850-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sandra Incardona, Elisa Serra-Casas, Nora Champouillon, Christian Nsanzabana, Jane Cunningham, Iveth J. González

Abstract

Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) play a critical role in malaria case management, and assurance of quality is a key factor to promote good adherence to test results. Since 2007, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) have coordinated a Malaria RDT Evaluation Programme, comprising a pre-purchase performance evaluation (product testing, PT) and a pre-distribution quality control of lots (lot testing, LT), the former being the basis of WHO recommendations for RDT procurement. Comprehensive information on malaria RDTs sold worldwide based on manufacturers' data and linked to independent performance data is currently not available, and detailed knowledge of procurement practices remains limited. The use of the PT/LT Programme results as well as procurement and lot verification practices were assessed through a large-scale survey, gathering product-specific RDT sales and procurement data (2011-14 period) from a total of 32 manufacturers, 12 procurers and 68 National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs). Manufacturers' reports showed that RDT sales had more than doubled over the four years, and confirmed a trend towards increased compliance with the WHO procurement criteria (from 83% in 2011 to 93% in 2014). Country-level reports indicated that 74% of NMCPs procured only 'WHO-compliant' RDT products, although procurers' transactions datasets revealed a surprisingly frequent overlap of different products and even product types (e.g., Plasmodium falciparum-only and Plasmodium-pan) in the same year and country (60 and 46% of countries, respectively). Importantly, the proportion of 'non-complying' (i.e., PT low scored or not evaluated) products was found to be higher in the private health care sector than in the public sector (32% vs 5%), and increasing over time (from 22% of private sector sales in 2011 to 39% in 2014). An estimated 70% of the RDT market was covered by the LT programme. The opinion about the PT/LT Programmes was positive overall, and quality of RDTs as per the PT Programme was rated as the number one procurement criteria. This survey provided in-depth information on RDT sales and procurement dynamics, including the largely unstudied private sector, and demonstrated how the WHO-FIND Programme has positively influenced procurement practices in the public sector.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Other 7 7%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 23 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 23 22%
Unknown 31 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,786,529
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,161
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,660
of 313,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#77
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 313,883 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.