↓ Skip to main content

Setting a Nigeria national malaria operational research agenda: the process

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

3 tweeters


1 Dimensions

Readers on

34 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.
Setting a Nigeria national malaria operational research agenda: the process
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3224-5
Pubmed ID

Olufemi Ajumobi, Perpetua Uhomoibhi, Pamela Onyiah, Obafemi Babalola, Salami Sharafadeen, Maduka D. Ughasoro, Al-Mukhtar Y. Adamu, Oluwaseun Odeyinka, Taiwo Orimogunje, Ibrahim Maikore, Emmanuel Shekarau, Akintayo Ogunwale, Rotimi Afolabi, Sylvester Udeh, Akpuh Ndubuisi, Ntiense Umoette, Patrick Nguku, IkeOluwapo O. Ajayi


Employing malaria operational research (MOR) findings in planning national malaria control programmes is gaining increased attention. The malaria control foci are diverse, resources are limited; therefore, agreeing on priority areas is critical. Hitherto, the process of prioritising MOR questions in Nigeria has been limited to few stakeholders. In support of the National Malaria Elimination Programme's (NMEP) effort at setting a MOR agenda, the Nigeria Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Programme (NFELTP) in collaboration with NMEP conducted preliminary exploratory study to identify key malaria research gaps and needs, and provide data to inform setting a robust national MOR agenda. The process of generating data is presented in this paper. A twelve-member task-team comprising NFELTP, university researchers and NMEP officers was commissioned. Following an inaugural meeting the task-team developed a framework of activities and held five planning meetings, conducted five-week online and self-administered paper-based surveys, key informant interview (KII), two-day desk review workshop, seven-day qualitative data analysis, ten-day result and five-day report writing workshops. Paired group members conducted the interviews across six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. Abridged study report was used for a two-day MOR setting agenda stakeholders' workshop. A structured framework, study protocol and data collection instruments were developed and submitted for ethical approval. The instruments included survey questionnaire for detailed information on researchers and other stakeholders' experience with MOR, the gaps and needs in thematic MOR areas; KII and Delphi guides. After an initial scoping review, primary data were collected from purposively selected survey participants using mixed methods: - online survey (n = 100), self-administered paper-based survey (n = 85), KII (n = 40), desk review workshop (n = 22) and Delphi interviews (n = 8). Comprehensive lists of research gaps/bottlenecks and needs were generated for each thematic area in malaria control. These were used at a two-day national MOR setting stakeholder workshop (n = 54) to guide the development of national MOR agenda document. A systematic approach involving broad stakeholder engagement provided data and evidence-based information for development of a robust national MOR agenda. The processes involved are recommended for use in malaria endemic settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Librarian 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 December 2018.
All research outputs
of 14,067,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
of 4,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 273,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,067,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 273,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them