↓ Skip to main content

Compliance with anthelmintic treatment in the neglected tropical diseases control programmes: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 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
Compliance with anthelmintic treatment in the neglected tropical diseases control programmes: a systematic review
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1311-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn V. Shuford, Hugo C. Turner, Roy M. Anderson

Abstract

Preventive chemotherapy (PCT) programmes are used to control five of the highest burden neglected tropical diseases (NTDs): soil-transmitted helminth infections (hookworm, ascariasis, and trichuriasis), lymphatic filariasis, schistosomiasis, onchocerciasis, and trachoma. Over the past decade, new resource commitments for the NTDs have enabled such programmes to intensify their control efforts, and for some diseases, to shift from goals of morbidity control to the interruption of transmission and elimination. To successfully eliminate the parasite reservoir, these programmes will undoubtedly require prolonged, high treatment coverage. However, it is important to consider that even when coverage levels reach an acceptable proportion of the target population, there may be a considerable gap between coverage (those who receive the drug) and compliance (those who actually consume the drug)-a topic of fundamental and perhaps underestimated importance. We conducted a systematic review of published literature that investigated compliance to PCT programmes for NTD control and elimination. Databases searched included PubMed/Medline, Web of Knowledge (including Web of Science), OVID, and Scopus. Data were collected on compliance rates, reasons for non-compliance, as well as the heterogeneity of compliance definitions and calculations across programmes and studies. A total of 112 studies were selected for inclusion. The findings of the review revealed substantial heterogeneity across compliance terms and definitions; an imbalance of available studies for particular disease areas and countries; and finally, a lack of longitudinal compliance studies to properly investigate the role of systematic non-compliance. The lack of consistency among reporting of compliance data can result in under- or over-estimating compliance in a population, and therefore has serious implications for setting and reaching elimination targets. Reframing of the guidelines on compliance definitions coupled with an urgent call for longitudinal research in systematic non-compliance should be essential elements in the programmatic shift from control to elimination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 169 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 20%
Student > Master 31 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Other 10 6%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 42 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 5%
Environmental Science 7 4%
Other 38 22%
Unknown 52 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 February 2024.
All research outputs
#7,921,650
of 25,335,657 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,840
of 5,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,244
of 409,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#49
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,335,657 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,954 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 409,414 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 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 69% of its contemporaries.