Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18384669›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2008

Guidelines and mindlines: why do clinical staff over-diagnose malaria in Tanzania? A qualitative study.

Clare I R Chandler, Caroline Jones, Gloria Boniface, Kaseem Juma, Hugh Reyburn, Christopher J M Whitty

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 156 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
156citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

156 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

96 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Clare I R ChandlerLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, WC1E 7HT, London, UK. clare.chandler@lshtm.ac.uk
Caroline Jones
Gloria Boniface
Kaseem Juma
Hugh Reyburn
Christopher J M Whitty
Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre · TZLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMalaria over-diagnosis in Africa is widespread and costly both financially and in terms of morbidity and mortality from missed diagnoses. An understanding of the reasons behind malaria over-diagnosis is urgently needed to inform strategies for better targeting of antimalarials.

methodsIn an ethnographic study of clinical practice in two hospitals in Tanzania, 2,082 patient consultations with 34 clinicians were observed over a period of three months at each hospital. All clinicians were also interviewed individually as well as being observed during routine working activities with colleagues. Interviews with five tutors and 10 clinical officer students at a nearby clinical officer training college were subsequently conducted.

resultsFour, primarily social, spheres of influence on malaria over-diagnosis were identified. Firstly, the influence of initial training within a context where the importance of malaria is strongly promoted. Secondly, the influence of peers, conforming to perceived expectations from colleagues. Thirdly, pressure to conform with perceived patient preferences. Lastly, quality of diagnostic support, involving resource management, motivation and supervision. Rather than following national guidelines for the diagnosis of febrile illness, clinician behaviour appeared to follow 'mindlines': shared rationales constructed from these different spheres of influence. Three mindlines were identified in this setting: malaria is easier to diagnose than alternative diseases; malaria is a more acceptable diagnosis; and missing malaria is indefensible. These mindlines were apparent during the training stages as well as throughout clinical careers.

conclusionClinicians were found to follow mindlines as well as or rather than guidelines, which incorporated multiple social influences operating in the immediate and the wider context of decision making. Interventions to move mindlines closer to guidelines need to take the variety of social influences into account.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelChild, PreschoolFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicMalariaMaleMiddle AgedPatientsPractice Guidelines as TopicQualitative ResearchTanzania

Identifiers

PMID18384669
PMCPMC2323020
OpenAlexW2090339074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.