↓ Skip to main content

Immediate assessment of performance of medical laboratory scientists following a 10-day malaria microscopy training programme in Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in Global Health Research and Policy, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Immediate assessment of performance of medical laboratory scientists following a 10-day malaria microscopy training programme in Nigeria
Published in
Global Health Research and Policy, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41256-017-0051-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bolatito Aiyenigba, Abiodun Ojo, Adolor Aisiri, Justus Uzim, Oluwole Adeusi, Halima Mwenesi

Abstract

Rapid and precise diagnosis of malaria is an essential element in effective case management and control of malaria. Malaria microscopy is used as the gold standard for malaria diagnosis, however results remain poor as positivity rate in Nigeria is consistently over 90%. The United States President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) through the Malaria Action Program for States (MAPS) supported selected states in Nigeria to build capacity for malaria microscopy. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of in-service training on malaria microscopy amongst medical laboratory scientists. The training was based on the World Health Organization (WHO) basic microscopy training manual. The 10-day training utilized a series of didactic lectures and examination of teaching slides using a CX 21 Olympus binocular microscope. All 108 medical laboratory scientists trained from 2012 to 2015 across five states in Nigeria supported by PMI were included in the study. Evaluation of the training using a pre-and post-test method was based on written test questions; reading photographic slide images of malaria parasites; and prepared slides. There was a significant improvement in the mean written pre-and post-tests scores from 37.9% (95% CI 36.2-39.6%) to 70.7% (95% CI 68.4-73.1%) (p < 0.001). The mean counting post-test score improved significantly from 4.2% (95% CI 2.6-5.7%) to 27.9% (95% CI 25.3-30.5%) (p < 0.001). Mean post-test score for computer-based picture speciation test (63.0%) and picture detection test (89.2%) were significantly higher than the mean post-test score for slide reading speciation test (38.3%) and slide reading detection test (70.7%), p < 0.001 in both cases. Parasite detection and speciation using enhanced visual imaging was significantly improved compared with using direct microscopy. Regular in-service training and provision of functional and high resolution microscopes are needed to ensure quality routine malaria microscopy.

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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 17%
Social Sciences 5 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,690,781
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Global Health Research and Policy
#113
of 265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,230
of 342,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health Research and Policy
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 342,377 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.