ArticleHealth services research2019
Effectiveness of antimalarial interventions in Nigeria: Evidence from facility-level longitudinal data.
Article in Health services research, 2019. 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.
- Effectiveness of antimalarial interventions in Nigeria: Evidence from facility-level longitudinal data.Health services research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a program of antimalarial interventions implemented in 2010-2013 in Niger State, Nigeria. DATA SOURCES: Utilization reports from 99 intervention and 51 non-intervention health facilities from the Niger State Malaria Elimination Program, supplemented by data on facility-level characteristics from the Niger State Primary Health Care Development Agency and Local Government Malaria Control units. STUDY
designEstimated with mixed-effects negative binomial modeling, a difference-in-differences method was used to quantify the impact of the program on the number of febrile illness cases and confirmed malaria cases. Potential confounding factors, non-stationarity, seasonality, and autocorrelation were explicitly accounted for. DATA EXTRACTION
methodsData were retrieved from hard copies of utilization reports and manually inputted to create a panel of 5550 facility-month observations. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe program was implemented in two phases. The first phase (August 2010-June 2012) involved the provision of free artemisinin-based combination therapies, long-lasting insecticidal nets, and intermittent preventive treatments. In the second phase (July 2012-March 2013), the program introduced an additional intervention: free parasite-based rapid diagnostic tests. Compared to the pre-intervention period, the average number of monthly febrile illness and malaria cases increased by 20.876 (P < 0.01) and 22.835 (P < 0.01) in the first phase, and by 19.007 (P < 0.05) and 19.681 (P < 0.05) in the second phase, respectively. The results are consistent across different evaluation methods.
conclusionsThis study suggests that user-fee removal leads to increased utilization of antimalarial services. It motivates future studies to cautiously select their investigative methods.
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.