↓ Skip to main content

Overuse of artemisinin-combination therapy in Mto wa Mbu (river of mosquitoes), an area misinterpreted as high endemic for malaria

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, November 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Overuse of artemisinin-combination therapy in Mto wa Mbu (river of mosquitoes), an area misinterpreted as high endemic for malaria
Published in
Malaria Journal, November 2008
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-7-232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles Mwanziva, Seif Shekalaghe, Arnold Ndaro, Bianca Mengerink, Simon Megiroo, Frank Mosha, Robert Sauerwein, Chris Drakeley, Roly Gosling, Teun Bousema

Abstract

Adequate malaria diagnosis and treatment remain major difficulties in rural sub-Saharan Africa. These issues deserve renewed attention in the light of first-line treatment with expensive artemisinin-combination therapy (ACT) and changing patterns of transmission intensity. This study describes diagnostic and treatment practices in Mto wa Mbu, an area that used to be hyperendemic for malaria, but where no recent assessments of transmission intensity have been conducted. Retrospective and prospective data were collected from the two major village health clinics. The diagnosis in prospectively collected data was confirmed by microscopy. The level of transmission intensity was determined by entomological assessment and by estimating sero-conversion rates using anti-malarial antibody responses. Malaria transmission intensity by serological assessment was equivalent to < 1 infectious bites per person per year. Despite low transmission intensity, > 40% of outpatients attending the clinics in 2006-2007 were diagnosed with malaria. Prospective data demonstrated a very high overdiagnosis of malaria. Microscopy was unreliable with < 1% of slides regarded as malaria parasite-positive by clinic microscopists being confirmed by trained research microscopists. In addition, many 'slide negatives' received anti-malarial treatment. As a result, 99.6% (248/249) of the individuals who were treated with ACT were in fact free of malaria parasites. Transmission intensity has dropped considerably in the area of Mto wa Mbu. Despite this, most fevers are still regarded and treated as malaria, thereby ignoring true causes of febrile illness and over-prescribing ACT. The discrepancy between the perceived and actual level of transmission intensity may be present in many areas in sub-Saharan Africa and calls for greater efforts in defining levels of transmission on a local scale to help rational drug-prescribing behaviour.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Tanzania, United Republic of 2 3%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 69 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Other 6 8%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 8 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 15%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 9 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 31 May 2017.
All research outputs
#3,009,279
of 11,194,639 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,239
of 3,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,406
of 238,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#61
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,194,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 50th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,338 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 238,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 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 56% of its contemporaries.