↓ Skip to main content

Use and limitations of malaria rapid diagnostic testing by community health workers in war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 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
Use and limitations of malaria rapid diagnostic testing by community health workers in war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo
Published in
Malaria Journal, December 2009
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-8-308
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Hawkes, Jean Paul Katsuva, Claude K Masumbuko

Abstract

Accurate and practical malaria diagnostics, such as immunochromatographic rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), have the potential to avert unnecessary treatments and save lives. Volunteer community health workers (CHWs) represent a potentially valuable human resource for expanding this technology to where it is most needed, remote rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa with limited health facilities and personnel. This study reports on a training programme for CHWs to incorporate RDTs into their management strategy for febrile children in the Democratic Republic of Congo, a tropical African setting ravaged by human conflict.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Kenya 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 183 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 16%
Student > Master 31 16%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Other 10 5%
Other 44 23%
Unknown 35 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Social Sciences 14 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 4%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 46 24%