↓ Skip to main content

The impact of residual infections on Anopheles-transmitted Wuchereria bancrofti after multiple rounds of mass drug administration

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
The impact of residual infections on Anopheles-transmitted Wuchereria bancrofti after multiple rounds of mass drug administration
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13071-015-1091-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dziedzom K. de Souza, Rashid Ansumana, Santigie Sessay, Abu Conteh, Benjamin Koudou, Maria P. Rebollo, Joseph Koroma, Daniel A. Boakye, Moses J. Bockarie

Abstract

Many countries have made significant progress in the implementation of World Health Organization recommended preventive chemotherapy strategy, to eliminate lymphatic filariasis (LF). However, pertinent challenges such as the existence of areas of residual infections in disease endemic districts pose potential threats to the achievements made. Thus, this study was undertaken to assess the importance of these areas in implementation units (districts) where microfilaria (MF) positive individuals could not be found during the mid-term assessment after three rounds of mass drug administration. This study was undertaken in Bo and Pujehun, two LF endemic districts of Sierra Leone, with baseline MF prevalence of 2 % and 0 % respectively in sentinel sites for monitoring impact of the national programme. Study communities in the districts were purposefully selected and an assessment of LF infection prevalence was conducted together with entomological investigations undertaken to determine the existence of areas with residual MF that could enable transmission by local vectors. The transmission Assessment Survey (TAS) protocol described by WHO was applied in the two districts to determine infection of LF in 6-7 year old children who were born before MDA against LF started. The results indicated the presence of MF infected children in Pujehun district. An. gambiae collected in the district were also positive for W. bancrofti, even though the prevalence of infection was below the threshold associated with active transmission. Residual infection was detected after three rounds of MDA in Pujehun - a district of 0 % Mf prevalence at the sentinel site. Nevertheless, our results showed that the transmission was contained in a small area. With the scale up of vector control in Anopheles transmission zones, some areas of residual infection may not pose a serious threat for the resurgence of LF if the prevalence of infections observed during TAS are below the threshold required for active transmission of the parasite. However, robust surveillance strategies capable of detecting residual infections must be implemented, together with entomological assessments to determine if ongoing vector control activities, biting rates and infection rates of the vectors can support the transmission of the disease. Furthermore, in areas where mid-term assessments reveal MF prevalence below 1 % or 2 % antigen level, in Anopheles transmission areas with active and effective malaria vector control efforts, the minimum 5 rounds of MDA may not be required before implementing TAS. Thus, we propose a modification of the WHO recommendation for the timing of sentinel and spot-check site assessments in national programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 86 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 27 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 25 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,238,817
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,824
of 5,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,004
of 274,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#61
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 274,665 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 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 53% of its contemporaries.