↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to routine G6PD testing prior to treatment with primaquine

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Barriers to routine G6PD testing prior to treatment with primaquine
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-1981-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedikt Ley, Kamala Thriemer, Jessica Jaswal, Eugenie Poirot, Mohammad Shafiul Alam, Ching Swe Phru, Wasif Ali Khan, Lek Dysoley, Gao Qi, Chong Chee Kheong, Ummi Kalthom Shamsudin, Ingrid Chen, Jimee Hwang, Roly Gosling, Ric N. Price

Abstract

Primaquine is essential for the radical cure of vivax malaria, however its broad application is hindered by the risk of drug-induced haemolysis in individuals with glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. Rapid diagnostic tests capable of diagnosing G6PD deficiency are now available, but these are not used widely. A series of qualitative interviews were conducted with policy makers and healthcare providers in four vivax-endemic countries. Routine G6PD testing is not part of current policy in Bangladesh, Cambodia or China, but it is in Malaysia. The interviews were analysed with regard to respondents perceptions of vivax malaria, -primaquine based treatment for malaria and the complexities of G6PD deficiency. Three barriers to the roll-out of routine G6PD testing were identified in all sites: (a) a perceived low risk of drug-induced haemolysis; (b) the perception that vivax malaria was benign and accordingly treatment with primaquine was not regarded as a priority; and, (c) the additional costs of introducing routine testing. In Malaysia, respondents considered the current test and treat algorithm suitable and the need for an alternative approach was only considered relevant in highly mobile and hard to reach populations. Greater efforts are needed to increase awareness of the benefits of the radical cure of Plasmodium vivax and this should be supported by economic analyses exploring the cost effectiveness of routine G6PD testing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 24%
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Professor 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,542,312
of 23,322,258 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,853
of 5,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,768
of 318,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#64
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,657 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 66% 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 318,788 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 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 51% of its contemporaries.