ArticleMalaria journal2017
Donor support for quality assurance and pharmacovigilance of anti-malarials in malaria-endemic countries.
Article in Malaria journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMalaria control efforts have been strengthened by funding from donor groups and government agencies. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and the Malaria (Global Fund), the US President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) account for the majority of donor support for malaria control and prevention efforts. Pharmacovigilance (PV), which encompasses all activities relating to the detection, assessment, understanding, and prevention of adverse effects or any other drug-related problem, is a necessary part of efforts to reduce drug resistance and improve treatment outcomes. This paper reports on an analysis of PV plans in the Global Fund and PMI and World Bank's grants for malaria prevention and control.
methodsAll active malaria grants as of September 2015 funded by the Global Fund and World Bank, and fiscal year 2015 and 2016 PMI Malaria Operational Plans (MOP) were identified. The total amount awarded for PV-related activities and drug quality assurance was abstracted. A Key-Word-in-Context (KWIC) analysis was conducted for the content of each grant. Specific search terms consisted of pharmacovigilance, pregn*, registry, safety, adverse drug, mass drug administration, primaquine, counterfeit, sub-standard, and falsified. Grants that mentioned PV activities identified in the KWIC search, listed PV in their budgets, or included the keywords: counterfeit, sub-standard, falsified, mass drug administration, or adverse event were thematically coded using Dedoose software version 7.0.
resultsThe search identified 159 active malaria grants including 107 Global Fund grants, 39 fiscal year 2015 and 2016 PMI grants and 13 World Bank grants. These grants were primarily awarded to low-income countries (57.2%) and in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) (70.4%). Thirty-seven (23.3%) grants included a budget line for PV- or drug quality assurance-related activities, including 21 PMI grants and 16 Global Fund grants. Only 23 (14.5%) grants directly mentioned PV. The primary focus area was improving drug quality monitoring, especially among the PMI grants.
conclusionsThe results of the analysis demonstrate that funding for PV has not been sufficiently prioritized by either the key malaria donor organizations or by the recipient countries, as reflected in their grant proposal submissions and MOPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.