↓ Skip to main content

Reactive case-detection of malaria in Pailin Province, Western Cambodia: lessons from a year-long evaluation in a pre-elimination setting

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 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
Reactive case-detection of malaria in Pailin Province, Western Cambodia: lessons from a year-long evaluation in a pre-elimination setting
Published in
Malaria Journal, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1191-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Hustedt, Sara E. Canavati, Chandary Rang, Ruth A. Ashton, Nimol Khim, Laura Berne, Saorin Kim, Siv Sovannaroth, Po Ly, Didier Ménard, Jonathan Cox, Sylvia Meek, Arantxa Roca-Feltrer

Abstract

As momentum towards malaria elimination grows, strategies are being developed for scale-up in elimination settings. One prominent strategy, reactive case detection (RACD), involves screening and treating individuals living in close proximity to passively detected, or "index" cases. This study aims to use RACD to quantify Plasmodium parasitaemia in households of index cases, and identify risk factors for infection; these data could inform reactive screening approaches and identify target risk groups. This study was conducted in the Western Cambodian province of Pailin between May 2013 and March 2014 among 440 households. Index participants/index cases (n = 270) and surrounding households (n = 110) were screened for Plasmodium infection with rapid diagnostic tests (RDT), microscopy and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Participants were interviewed to identify risk factors. A comparison group of 60 randomly-selected households was also screened, to compare infection levels of RACD and non-RACD households. In order to identify potential risk factors that would inform screening approaches and identify risk groups, multivariate logistic regression models were applied. Nine infections were identified in households of index cases (RACD approach) through RDT screening of 1898 individuals (seven Plasmodium vivax, two Plasmodium falciparum); seven were afebrile. Seventeen infections were identified through PCR screening of 1596 individuals (15 P. vivax, and 22 % P. falciparum/P. vivax mixed infections). In the control group, 25 P. falciparum infections were identified through PCR screening of 237 individuals, and no P. vivax was found. Plasmodium falciparum infection was associated with fever (p = 0.013), being a member of a control household (p ≤ 0.001), having a history of malaria infection (p = 0.041), and sleeping without a mosquito net (p = 0.011). Significant predictors of P. vivax infection, as diagnosed by PCR, were fever (p = 0.058, borderline significant) and history of malaria infection (p ≤ 0.001). This study found that RACD identified very few secondary infections when targeting index and neighbouring households for screening. The results suggest RACD is not appropriate, where exposure to malaria occurs away from the community, and there is a high level of treatment-seeking from the private sector. Piloting RACD in a range of transmission settings would help to identify the ideal environment for feasible and effective reactive screening methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 %
Thailand 1 1%
Unknown 86 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 24%
Researcher 20 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 4 5%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 19 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Other 14 16%
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 02 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,553,567
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,026
of 5,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,699
of 299,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#120
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 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 5,652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 299,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.