↓ Skip to main content

Low prevalence of Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale mono-infections among children in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a population-based, cross-sectional study

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Low prevalence of Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale mono-infections among children in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a population-based, cross-sectional study
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1409-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie M. Doctor, Yunhao Liu, Olivia G. Anderson, Amy N. Whitesell, Melchior Kashamuka Mwandagalirwa, Jérémie Muwonga, Corinna Keeler, Michael Emch, Joris L. Likwela, Antoinette Tshefu, Steven R. Meshnick

Abstract

In an effort to improve surveillance for epidemiological and clinical outcomes, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have become increasingly widespread as cost-effective and field-ready methods of malaria diagnosis. However, there are concerns that using RDTs specific to Plasmodium falciparum may lead to missed detection of other malaria species such as Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale. Four hundred and sixty six samples were selected from children under 5 years old in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) who took part in a Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) in 2013-14. These samples were first tested for all Plasmodium species using an 18S ribosomal RNA-targeted real-time PCR; malaria-positive samples were then tested for P. falciparum, P. malariae and P. ovale using a highly sensitive nested PCR. The prevalence of P. falciparum, P. malariae and P. ovale were 46.6, 12.9 and 8.3 %, respectively. Most P. malariae and P. ovale infections were co-infected with P. falciparum-the prevalence of mono-infections of these species were only 1.0 and 0.6 %, respectively. Six out of these eight mono-infections were negative by RDT. The prevalence of P. falciparum by the more sensitive nested PCR was higher than that found previously by real-time PCR. Plasmodium malariae and P. ovale remain endemic at a low rate in the DRC, but the risk of missing malarial infections of these species due to falciparum-specific RDT use is low. The observed prevalence of P. falciparum is higher with a more sensitive PCR method.

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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 18 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,379,760
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,489
of 5,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,023
of 354,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#93
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,579 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 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 354,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.