↓ Skip to main content

Lessons learnt from the first controlled human malaria infection study conducted in Nairobi, Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Lessons learnt from the first controlled human malaria infection study conducted in Nairobi, Kenya
Published in
Malaria Journal, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0671-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne H Hodgson, Elizabeth Juma, Amina Salim, Charles Magiri, Daniel Njenga, Sassy Molyneux, Patricia Njuguna, Ken Awuondo, Brett Lowe, Peter F Billingsley, Andrew O Cole, Caroline Ogwang, Faith Osier, Roma Chilengi, Stephen L Hoffman, Simon J Draper, Bernhards Ogutu, Kevin Marsh

Abstract

Controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) studies, in which healthy volunteers are infected with Plasmodium falciparum to assess the efficacy of novel malaria vaccines and drugs, have become a vital tool to accelerate vaccine and drug development. CHMI studies provide a cost-effective and expeditious way to circumvent the use of large-scale field efficacy studies to deselect intervention candidates. However, to date few modern CHMI studies have been performed in malaria-endemic countries. An open-label, randomized pilot CHMI study was conducted using aseptic, purified, cryopreserved, infectious P. falciparum sporozoites (SPZ) (Sanaria® PfSPZ Challenge) administered intramuscularly (IM) to healthy Kenyan adults (n = 28) with varying degrees of prior exposure to P. falciparum. The purpose of the study was to establish the PfSPZ Challenge CHMI model in a Kenyan setting with the aim of increasing the international capacity for efficacy testing of malaria vaccines and drugs, and allowing earlier assessment of efficacy in a population for which interventions are being developed. This was part of the EDCTP-funded capacity development of the CHMI platform in Africa. This paper discusses in detail lessons learnt from conducting the first CHMI study in Kenya. Issues pertinent to the African setting, including community sensitization, consent and recruitment are considered. Detailed reasoning regarding the study design (for example, dose and route of administration of PfSPZ Challenge, criteria for grouping volunteers according to prior exposure to malaria and duration of follow-up post CHMI) are given and changes other centres may want to consider for future studies are suggested. Performing CHMI studies in an African setting presents unique but surmountable challenges and offers great opportunity for acceleration of malaria vaccine and drug development. The reflections in this paper aim to aid other centres and partners intending to use the CHMI model in Africa.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Ghana 1 1%
Unknown 74 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 21%
Student > Master 16 21%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Arts and Humanities 4 5%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 11 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#535,340
of 16,522,185 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#67
of 4,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,344
of 233,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,522,185 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,614 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 233,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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