↓ Skip to main content

Adherence to national guidelines for the diagnosis and management of severe malaria: a nationwide, cross-sectional survey in Malawi, 2012

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 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
Adherence to national guidelines for the diagnosis and management of severe malaria: a nationwide, cross-sectional survey in Malawi, 2012
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1423-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica P. Shah, Melissa Briggs-Hagen, Jobiba Chinkhumba, Andy Bauleni, Alfred Chalira, Dubulao Moyo, Wilfred Dodoli, Misheck Luhanga, John Sande, Doreen Ali, Julie Gutman, Don P. Mathanga, Kim A. Lindblade

Abstract

Severe malaria has a case fatality rate of 10-20 %; however, few studies have addressed the quality of severe malaria case management. This study evaluated the diagnostic and treatment practices of malaria patients admitted to inpatient health facilities (HF) in Malawi. In July-August 2012, a nationwide, cross-sectional survey of severe malaria management was conducted in 36 HFs selected with equal probability from all eligible public sector HFs in Malawi. Patient records from all admissions during October 2011 and April 2012 (low and high season, respectively) were screened for an admission diagnosis of malaria or prescription of any anti-malarial. Eligible records were stratified by age (< 5 or ≥ 5 years). A maximum of eight records was randomly selected within each age and month stratum. Severe malaria was defined by admission diagnosis or documentation of at least one sign or symptom of severe malaria. Treatment with intravenous (IV) quinine or artesunate was considered correct. Patients without documentation of severe malaria were analysed as uncomplicated malaria patients; treatment with an artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) or oral quinine based on malaria test results was considered correct. All analyses accounted for HF level clustering and sampling weights. The analysis included 906 records from 35 HFs. Among these, 42 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 35-49) had a severe malaria admission diagnosis and 50 % (95 % CI 44-57) had at least one severe malaria sign or symptom documented. Severe malaria patients defined by admission diagnosis (93, 95 % CI 86-99) were more likely to be treated correctly compared to patients defined by a severe sign (82, 95 % CI 75-89) (p < 0.0001). Among uncomplicated malaria patients, 26 % (95 % CI 18-35) were correctly treated and 53 % (95 % CI 42-64) were adequately treated with IV quinine alone or in combination with an ACT or oral quinine. A majority of patients diagnosed with severe malaria received the recommended IV therapy in accordance with national treatment guidelines. However, the inconsistencies between diagnosis of severe malaria and documentation of severe signs and symptoms highlight the need to improve healthcare worker recognition and documentation of severe signs and symptoms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 12 18%
Student > Postgraduate 10 15%
Researcher 9 13%
Other 5 7%
Other 18 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 15%
Unspecified 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 14 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 16 November 2016.
All research outputs
#361,623
of 8,642,080 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#71
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,221
of 261,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#5
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,642,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 261,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 140 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.