↓ Skip to main content

In vivo efficacy of artesunate–amodiaquine and artemether–lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria: an open-randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial in South Kivu…

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
In vivo efficacy of artesunate–amodiaquine and artemether–lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria: an open-randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial in South Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo
Published in
Malaria Journal, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1444-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marit de Wit, Anna L. Funk, Krystel Moussally, David Aksanti Nkuba, Ruby Siddiqui, Karla Bil, Erwan Piriou, Aldert Bart, Patrick Bahizi Bizoza, Teun Bousema

Abstract

Between 2009 and 2012, malaria cases diagnosed in a Médecins sans Frontières programme have increased fivefold in Baraka, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The cause of this increase is not known. An in vivo drug efficacy trial was conducted to determine whether increased treatment failure rates may have contributed to the apparent increase in malaria diagnoses. In an open-randomized non-inferiority trial, the efficacy of artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ) was compared to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in 288 children aged 6-59 months. Included children had directly supervised treatment and were then followed for 42 days with weekly clinical and parasitological evaluations. The blood samples of children found to have recurring parasitaemia within 42 days were checked by PCR to confirm whether or not this was due to reinfection or recrudescence (i.e. treatment failure). Out of 873 children screened, 585 (67 %) were excluded and 288 children were randomized to either ASAQ or AL. At day 42 of follow up, the treatment efficacy of ASAQ was 78 % before and 95 % after PCR correction for re-infections. In the AL-arm, treatment efficacy was 84 % before and 99.0 % after PCR correction. Treatment efficacy after PCR correction was within the margin of non-inferiority as set for this study. Fewer children in the AL arm reported adverse reactions. ASAQ is still effective as a treatment for uncomplicated malaria in Baraka, South Kivu, DRC. In this region, AL may have higher efficacy but additional trials are required to draw this conclusion with confidence. The high re-infection rate in South-Kivu indicates intense malaria transmission. Trial registration NCT02741024.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 15 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 20 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,927,056
of 21,505,234 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#406
of 5,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,359
of 287,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,505,234 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 287,845 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 88% of its contemporaries.
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