↓ Skip to main content

Enhanced surveillance and data feedback loop associated with improved malaria data in Lusaka, Zambia

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Enhanced surveillance and data feedback loop associated with improved malaria data in Lusaka, Zambia
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0735-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zunda Chisha, David A. Larsen, Matthew Burns, John M. Miller, Jacob Chirwa, Clara Mbwili, Daniel J. Bridges, Mulakwa Kamuliwo, Moonga Hawela, Kathrine R. Tan, Allen S. Craig, Anna M. Winters

Abstract

Accurate and timely malaria data are crucial to monitor the progress towards and attainment of elimination. Lusaka, the capital city of Zambia, has reported very low malaria prevalence in Malaria Indicator Surveys. Issues of low malaria testing rates, high numbers of unconfirmed malaria cases and over consumption of anti-malarials were common at clinics within Lusaka, however. The Government of Zambia (GRZ) and its partners sought to address these issues through an enhanced surveillance and feedback programme at clinic level. The enhanced malaria surveillance programme began in 2011 to verify trends in reported malaria, as well as to implement a data feedback loop to improve data uptake, use, and quality. A process of monthly data collection and provision of feedback was implemented within all GRZ health clinics in Lusaka District. During clinic visits, clinic registers were accessed to record the number of reported malaria cases, malaria test positivity rate, malaria testing rate, and proportion of total suspected malaria that was confirmed with a diagnostic test. Following the enhanced surveillance programme, the odds of receiving a diagnostic test for a suspected malaria case increased (OR = 1.54, 95 % CI = 0.96-2.49) followed by an upward monthly trend (OR = 1.05, 95 % CI = 1.01-1.09). The odds of a reported malaria case being diagnostically confirmed also increased monthly (1.09, 95 % CI 1.04-1.15). After an initial 140 % increase (95 % CI = 91-183 %), costs fell by 11 % each month (95 % CI = 5.7-10.9 %). Although the mean testing rate increased from 18.9 to 64.4 % over the time period, the proportion of reported malaria unconfirmed by diagnostic remained high at 76 %. Enhanced surveillance and implementation of a data feedback loop have substantially increased malaria testing rates and decreased the number of unconfirmed malaria cases and courses of ACT consumed in Lusaka District within just two years. Continued support of enhanced surveillance in Lusaka as well as national scale-up of the system is recommended to reinforce good case management and to ensure timely, reliable data are available to guide targeting of limited malaria prevention and control resources in Zambia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 28%
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Other 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 6 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 31%
Social Sciences 12 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 6 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,539,208
of 12,079,889 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#677
of 3,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,568
of 230,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#33
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,079,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 230,969 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 73% of its contemporaries.