Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25495698›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2014

Comparison of a mobile phone-based malaria reporting system with source participant register data for capturing spatial and temporal trends in epidemiological indicators of malaria transmission collected by community health workers in rural Zambia.

Busiku Hamainza, Gerry F Killeen, Mulakwa Kamuliwo, Adam Bennett, Joshua O Yukich

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Healthcare Workers' Perspectives of mHealth Adoption Factors in the Developing World: Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

5 authors.

Busiku HamainzaMinistry of Health, National Malaria Control Centre, Chainama Hospital College Grounds, off Great East road, P,O, Box 32509, Lusaka, Zambia. bossbusk@gmail.com.
Gerry F Killeen
Mulakwa Kamuliwo
Adam Bennett
Joshua O Yukich

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTimeliness, completeness, and accuracy are key requirements for any surveillance system to reliably monitor disease burden and guide efficient resource prioritization. Evidence that electronic reporting of malaria cases by community health workers (CHWs) meet these requirements remains limited. METHODOLOGY: Residents of two adjacent rural districts in Zambia were provided with both passive and active malaria testing and treatment services with malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and artemisinin-based combination therapy by 42 CHWs serving 14 population clusters centred around public sector health facilities. Reference data describing total numbers of RDT-detected infections and diagnostic positivity (DP) were extracted from detailed participant register books kept by CHWs. These were compared with equivalent weekly summaries relayed directly by the CHWs themselves through a mobile phone short messaging system (SMS) reporting platform.

resultsSlightly more RDT-detected malaria infections were recorded in extracted participant registers than were reported in weekly mobile phone summaries but the difference was equivalent to only 19.2% (31,665 versus 25,583, respectively). The majority (81%) of weekly SMS reports were received within one week and the remainder within one month. Overall mean [95% confidence limits] difference between the numbers of register-recorded and SMS-reported RDT-detected malaria infections per CHW per week, as estimated by the Bland Altman method, was only -2.3 [-21.9, 17.2]. The mean [range] for both the number of RDT-detected malaria infections (86 [0, 463] versus 73.6 [0, 519], respectively)) and DP (22.8% [0.0 to 96.3%] versus 23.2% [0.4 to 75.8%], respectively) reported by SMS were generally very consistent with those recorded in the reference paper-based register data and exhibited similar seasonality patterns across all study clusters. Overall, mean relative differences in the SMS reports and reference register data were more consistent with each other for DP than for absolute numbers of RDT-detected infections, presumably because this indicator is robust to variations in patient reporting rates by location, weather, season and calendar event because these are included in both the nominator and denominator. DISCUSSION/

conclusionThe SMS reports captured malaria transmission trends with adequate accuracy and could be used for population-wide, continuous, longitudinal monitoring of malaria transmission.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneEpidemiological MonitoringRegistriesCommunity Health WorkersDisease NotificationFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMalariaMaleRural PopulationSpatio-Temporal AnalysisZambia

Identifiers

PMID25495698
PMCPMC4295270

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.