↓ Skip to main content

Assessing supply-side barriers to uptake of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in pregnancy: a qualitative study and document and record review in two regions of Uganda

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
262 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
Assessing supply-side barriers to uptake of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in pregnancy: a qualitative study and document and record review in two regions of Uganda
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1405-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Rassi, Kirstie Graham, Patrobas Mufubenga, Rebecca King, Joslyn Meier, Sam Siduda Gudoi

Abstract

Intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), provided as part of routine antenatal care (ANC), is one of three malaria-in-pregnancy prevention and control mechanisms recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, despite high ANC attendance and increased efforts to address known obstacles, IPTp uptake figures have remained low. This study aimed to identify and assess barriers that continue to impede IPTp uptake in Uganda, in particular for women who attend ANC. The paper focuses on supply-side barriers, i.e., challenges relating to the health service provider. In-depth interviews were conducted in two regions of Uganda in November 2013 and April/May 2014 with four different target audiences: seven district health officials, 15 health workers, 19 women who had attended ANC, and five opinion leaders. In addition, a document and record review was carried out at four health facilities. Guidelines with regard to IPTp provision in Uganda have been shown to be inconsistent and, at the time of the research, did not reflect the most recent WHO policy recommendation. There is a lack of training and supervision opportunities for health workers, resulting in poor knowledge of IPTp guidelines and uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of SP. ANC is not consistently offered in health facilities, leading to some women being denied services. While strengthening of the supply chain appears to have reduced the occurrence of stock-outs of SP in public facilities, stock-outs reportedly continue to occur in the private sector. There are also sources of data inaccuracy along the data recording and reporting chain, limiting policy makers' ability to react adequately to trends and challenges. Given the high ANC attendance rates in Uganda, supply-side barriers are likely to account for many missed opportunities for the provision of IPTp in Uganda. Improvements will require consistent provision of ANC, implementation of current WHO IPTp policy recommendations, supply of SP to the private sector, availability of clear guidelines, as well as improved training and supervision for health workers. Improving facility and district-level recording and reporting will further strengthen the country's ability to address uptake of IPTp.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters 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 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 262 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 24%
Student > Bachelor 39 15%
Researcher 36 14%
Student > Postgraduate 19 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Other 32 12%
Unknown 53 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 51 19%
Social Sciences 16 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 59 23%

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 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#10,159,959
of 17,365,229 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,146
of 4,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,171
of 267,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,365,229 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 267,009 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 51% 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