↓ Skip to main content

The central role of national programme management for the achievement of malaria elimination: a cross case-study analysis of nine malaria programmes

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
The central role of national programme management for the achievement of malaria elimination: a cross case-study analysis of nine malaria programmes
Published in
Malaria Journal, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1518-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cara Smith Gueye, Gretchen Newby, Jim Tulloch, Laurence Slutsker, Marcel Tanner, Roland D. Gosling

Abstract

A malaria eradication goal has been proposed, at the same time as a new global strategy and implementation framework. Countries are considering the strategies and tools that will enable progress towards malaria goals. The eliminating malaria case-study series reports were reviewed to identify successful programme management components using a cross-case study analytic approach. Nine out of ten case-study reports were included in the analysis (Bhutan, Cape Verde, Malaysia, Mauritius, Namibia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Turkmenistan). A conceptual framework for malaria elimination programme management was developed and data were extracted and synthesized. Findings were reviewed at a consultative workshop, which led to a revision of the framework and further data extraction and synthesis. Success factors of implementation, programme choices and changes, and enabling factors were distilled. Decentralized programmes enhanced engagement in malaria elimination by sub-national units and communities. Integration of the malaria programme into other health services was also common. Decentralization and integration were often challenging due to the skill and experience levels of newly tasked staff. Accountability for programme impact was not clarified for most programmes. Motivation of work force was a key factor in maintaining programme quality but there were few clear, detailed strategies provided. Different incentive schemes targeted various stakeholders. Training and supervision, although not well described, were prioritized by most programmes. Multi-sectoral collaboration helped some programmes share information, build strategies and interventions and achieve a higher quality of implementation. In most cases programme action was spurred by malaria outbreaks or a new elimination goal with strong leadership. Some programmes showed high capacity for flexibility through introduction of new strategies and tools. Several case-studies described methods for monitoring implementation quality and coverage; however analysis and feedback to those implementing malaria elimination in the periphery was not well described. Political commitment and sustained financing contributed to malaria programme success. Consistency of malaria programmes depends on political commitment, human and financial resources, and leadership. Operational capacity of the programme and the overall health system structure and strength are also important aspects. Malaria eradication will require adaptive, well-managed malaria programmes that are able to tailor implementation of evidence-based strategies, founded upon strong sub-national surveillance and response, with adequate funding and human resources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 134 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 29%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Professor 6 4%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 37 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 32 24%
Unknown 42 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,091,592
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,948
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,996
of 326,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#65
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 326,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.