↓ Skip to main content

Are village health volunteers as good as basic health staffs in providing malaria care? A country wide analysis from Myanmar, 2015

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Are village health volunteers as good as basic health staffs in providing malaria care? A country wide analysis from Myanmar, 2015
Published in
Malaria Journal, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2384-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nay Yi Yi Linn, Soundappan Kathirvel, Mrinalini Das, Badri Thapa, Md. Mushfiqur Rahman, Thae Maung Maung, Aye Mon Mon Kyaw, Aung Thi, Zaw Lin

Abstract

Malaria is one of the major public health problems in Myanmar. Village health volunteers (VHV) are the key malaria diagnosis and treatment service provider at community level in addition to basic health staffs (BHS). This countrywide analysis aimed to assess and compare the accessibility to- and quality of malaria care (treatment initiation, treatment within 24 h and complete treatment delivery) between VHV and BHS in Myanmar. This was a retrospective cohort study using record review of routinely collected programme data available in electronic format. All patients with undifferentiated fever screened and diagnosed for malaria in January-December 2015 by VHV and BHS under National Malaria Control Programme in Myanmar were included in the study. Unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) were calculated to assess the effect of VHV/BHS on receipt of treatment by patients. Of 978,735 undifferentiated fever patients screened in 2015, 11.0% of patients were found malaria positive and the malaria positivity in VHV and BHS group were 11.1 and 10.9% respectively. Access to malaria care: higher proportion of children aged 5-14 years (21.8% vs 17.3%) and females (43.7% vs 41.8%) with fever were screened for malaria by VHV compared to BHS. However, the same for children aged < 5 years was 2.2% lower in VHV group compared to BHS. Quality of malaria care: the proportion of malaria cases that received treatment was 96.6 and 94.9; treatment initiation within 24 h of fever was 44.7 and 34.1; and, complete treatment delivery was 80.9 and 88.2, respectively, in VHV and BHS groups. After adjustment for potential confounders, patients with malaria provided care by VHV had 1.02 times higher chance of receiving treatment compared to BHS [aPR (95% confidence interval) 1.017 (1.015, 1.020)]. The VHV were more accessible to children and women than BHS in providing malaria screening services. The malaria treatment services provided by VHV was as good as BHS. Further qualitative research to explore and address the challenges on initiation and delivering complete treatment by VHV including inventory assessment and cost-effectiveness studies on integration of VHV in routine health system are needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 26%
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 30%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 31 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 2021.
All research outputs
#6,001,578
of 19,839,988 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,885
of 5,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,621
of 291,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,839,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 291,391 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 62% 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