↓ Skip to main content

Supporting Option B+ scale up and strengthening the prevention of mother-to-child transmission cascade in central Malawi: results from a serial cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
225 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
Supporting Option B+ scale up and strengthening the prevention of mother-to-child transmission cascade in central Malawi: results from a serial cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1065-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael E. Herce, Tiwonge Mtande, Frank Chimbwandira, Innocent Mofolo, Christine K. Chingondole, Nora E. Rosenberg, Kathy E. Lancaster, Esmie Kamanga, Jacqueline Chinkonde, Wiza Kumwenda, Gerald Tegha, Mina C. Hosseinipour, Irving F. Hoffman, Francis E. Martinson, Eva Stein, Charles M. van der Horst

Abstract

We established Safeguard the Family (STF) to support Ministry of Health (MoH) scale-up of universal antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV-infected pregnant and breastfeeding women (Option B+) and to strengthen the prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) cascade from HIV testing and counseling (HTC) through maternal ART provision and post-delivery early infant HIV diagnosis (EID). To these ends, we implemented the following interventions in 5 districts: 1) health worker training and mentorship; 2) couples' HTC and male partner involvement; 3) women's psychosocial support groups; and 4) health and laboratory system strengthening for EID. We conducted a serial cross-sectional study using facility-level quarterly (Q) program data and individual-level infant HIV-1 DNA PCR data to evaluate STF performance on PMTCT indicators for project years (Y) 1 (April-December 2011) through 3 (January-December 2013), and compared these results to national averages. Facility-level uptake of HTC, ART, infant nevirapine prophylaxis, and infant DNA PCR testing increased significantly from quarterly baselines of 66 % (n/N = 32,433/48,804), 23 % (n/N = 442/1,958), 1 % (n/N = 10/1,958), and 52 % (n/N = 1,385/2,644) to 87 % (n/N = 39,458/45,324), 96 % (n/N = 2,046/2,121), 100 % (n/N = 2,121/2,121), and 62 % (n/N = 1,462/2,340), respectively, by project end (all p < 0.001). Quarterly HTC, ART, and infant nevirapine prophylaxis uptake outperformed national averages over years 2-3. While transitioning EID laboratory services to MoH, STF provided first-time HIV-1 DNA PCR testing for 2,226 of 11,261 HIV-exposed infants (20 %) tested in the MoH EID program in STF districts from program inception (Y2) through Y3. Of these, 78 (3.5 %) tested HIV-positive. Among infants with complete documentation (n = 608), median age at first testing decreased from 112 days (interquartile range, IQR: 57-198) in Y2 to 76 days (IQR: 46-152) in Y3 (p < 0.001). During Y3 (only year with national data for comparison), non-significantly fewer exposed infants tested HIV-positive (3.6 %) at first testing in STF districts than nationally (4.1 %) (p = 0.4). STF interventions, integrated within the MoH Option B+ program, achieved favorable HTC, maternal ART, infant prophylaxis, and EID services uptake, and a low proportion of infants found HIV-infected at first DNA PCR testing. Continued investments are needed to strengthen the PMTCT cascade, particularly around EID.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 224 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 52 23%
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 47 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 19%
Social Sciences 20 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 6%
Psychology 9 4%
Other 23 10%
Unknown 51 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 29 April 2018.
All research outputs
#5,421,315
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,589
of 7,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,282
of 264,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#41
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,676 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 264,494 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 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 71% of its contemporaries.