↓ Skip to main content

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: methodological challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, December 2017
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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of artemisinin-based and quinine-based treatments for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in pregnancy: methodological challenges
Published in
Malaria Journal, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-2135-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Makoto Saito, Mary Ellen Gilder, François Nosten, Rose McGready, Philippe J. Guérin

Abstract

There is no agreed standard method to assess the efficacy of anti-malarials for uncomplicated falciparum in pregnancy despite an increased risk of adverse outcomes for the mother and the fetus. The aim of this review is to present the currently available evidence from both observational and interventional cohort studies on anti-malarial efficacy in pregnancy and summarize the variability of assessment and reporting found in the review process. Efficacy methodology and assessment of artemisinin-based treatments (ABT) and quinine-based treatments (QBT) were reviewed systematically using seven databases and two clinical trial registries (protocol registration-PROSPERO: CRD42017054808). Pregnant women in all trimesters with parasitologically confirmed uncomplicated falciparum malaria were included irrespective of symptoms. This review attempted to re-calculate proportions of treatment success applying the same definition as the standard WHO methodology for non-pregnant populations. Aggregated data meta-analyses using data from randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments were performed by random effects model. A total of 48 eligible efficacy studies were identified including 7279 treated Plasmodium falciparum episodes. While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used in 24 studies for differentiating recurrence, the assessment and reporting of treatment efficacy was heterogeneous. When the same definition could be applied, PCR-corrected treatment failure of ≥ 10% at any time points was observed in 3/30 ABT and 3/7 QBT arms. Ten RCTs compared different combinations of ABT but there was a maximum of two published RCTs with PCR-corrected outcomes for each comparison. Five RCTs compared ABT and QBT. Overall, the risk of treatment failure was significantly lower in ABT than in QBT (risk ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.63), although the actual drug combinations and outcome endpoints were different. First trimester women were included in 12 studies none of which were RCTs of ABT. Efficacy studies in pregnancy are not only limited in number but use varied methodological assessments. In five RCTs with comparable methodology, ABT resulted in higher efficacy than QBT in the second and third trimester of pregnancy. Individual patient data meta-analysis can include data from observational cohort studies and could overcome some of the limitations of the current assessment given the paucity of data in this vulnerable group.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Professor 5 5%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 28 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,176,860
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#964
of 5,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,686
of 449,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#19
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 449,032 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.