Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28615026›Full record

ReviewMalaria journal2017

Engaging the private sector in malaria surveillance: a review of strategies and recommendations for elimination settings.

Adam Bennett, Anton L V Avanceña, Jennifer Wegbreit, Chris Cotter, Kathryn Roberts, Roly Gosling

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Malaria journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam BennettMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA. adam.bennett@ucsf.edu.
Anton L V AvanceñaMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4903-870X
Jennifer WegbreitMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Chris CotterMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Kathryn RobertsMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Roly GoslingMalaria Elimination Initiative, UCSF Global Health Group, 550 16th Street, 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn malaria elimination settings, all malaria cases must be identified, documented and investigated. To facilitate complete and timely reporting of all malaria cases and effective case management and follow-up, engagement with private providers is essential, particularly in settings where the private sector is a major source of healthcare. However, research on the role and performance of the private sector in malaria diagnosis, case management and reporting in malaria elimination settings is limited. Moreover, the most effective strategies for private sector engagement in malaria elimination settings remain unclear.

methodsTwenty-five experts in malaria elimination, disease surveillance and private sector engagement were purposively sampled and interviewed. An extensive review of grey and peer-reviewed literature on private sector testing, treatment, and reporting for malaria was performed. Additional in-depth literature review was conducted for six case studies on eliminating and neighbouring countries in Southeast Asia and Southern Africa.

resultsThe private health sector can be categorized based on their commercial orientation or business model (for-profit versus nonprofit) and their regulation status within a country (formal vs informal). A number of potentially effective strategies exist for engaging the private sector. Conducting a baseline assessment of the private sector is critical to understanding its composition, size, geographical distribution and quality of services provided. Facilitating reporting, referral and training linkages between the public and private sectors and making malaria a notifiable disease are important strategies to improve private sector involvement in malaria surveillance. Financial incentives for uptake of rapid diagnostic tests and artemisinin-based combination therapy should be combined with training and community awareness campaigns for improving uptake. Private sector providers can also be organized and better engaged through social franchising, effective regulation, professional organizations and government outreach.

conclusionThis review highlights the importance of engaging private sector stakeholders early and often in the development of malaria elimination strategies.

Indexed as

Epidemiological MonitoringPrivate SectorAfrica, SouthernAsia, SoutheasternHumansInterviews as TopicMalariaTelecommunicationsVideoconferencingMalariaMalaria eliminationMalaria surveillancePrivate sectorPrivate sector engagementSwazilandVietnam

Identifiers

PMID28615026
PMCPMC5471855
OpenAlexW2626253677

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.