Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31533740›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2019

Strengthening surveillance systems for malaria elimination: a global landscaping of system performance, 2015-2017.

Christopher Lourenço, Andrew J Tatem, Peter M Atkinson, Justin M Cohen, Deepa Pindolia, Darlene Bhavnani, Arnaud Le Menach

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.0field-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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Christopher LourençoClinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, 383 Dorchester Ave, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02127, USA. clourenco@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7156-866X
Andrew J TatemWorldPop, Department of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Peter M AtkinsonLancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Justin M CohenClinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, 383 Dorchester Ave, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02127, USA.
Deepa PindoliaClinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, 383 Dorchester Ave, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02127, USA.
Darlene BhavnaniClinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, 383 Dorchester Ave, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02127, USA.
Arnaud Le MenachClinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, 383 Dorchester Ave, Suite 400, Boston, MA, 02127, USA.
Clinton Health Access Initiative · USLancaster University · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1109772
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurveillance is a core component of an effective system to support malaria elimination. Poor surveillance data will prevent countries from monitoring progress towards elimination and targeting interventions to the last remaining at-risk places. An evaluation of the performance of surveillance systems in 16 countries was conducted to identify key gaps which could be addressed to build effective systems for malaria elimination.

methodsA standardized surveillance system landscaping was conducted between 2015 and 2017 in collaboration with governmental malaria programmes. Malaria surveillance guidelines from the World Health Organization and other technical bodies were used to identify the characteristics of an optimal surveillance system, against which systems of study countries were compared. Data collection was conducted through review of existing material and datasets, and interviews with key stakeholders, and the outcomes were summarized descriptively. Additionally, the cumulative fraction of incident infections reported through surveillance systems was estimated using surveillance data, government records, survey data, and other scientific sources.

resultsThe landscaping identified common gaps across countries related to the lack of surveillance coverage in remote communities or in the private sector, the lack of adequate health information architecture to capture high quality case-based data, poor integration of data from other sources such as intervention information, poor visualization of generated information, and its lack of availability for making programmatic decisions. The median percentage of symptomatic cases captured by the surveillance systems in the 16 countries was estimated to be 37%, mostly driven by the lack of treatment-seeking in the public health sector (64%) or, in countries with large private sectors, the lack of integration of this sector within the surveillance system.

conclusionsThe landscaping analysis undertaken provides a clear framework through which to identify multiple gaps in current malaria surveillance systems. While perfect systems are not required to eliminate malaria, closing the gaps identified will allow countries to deploy resources more efficiently, track progress, and accelerate towards malaria elimination. Since the landscaping undertaken here, several countries have addressed some of the identified gaps by improving coverage of surveillance, integrating case data with other information, and strengthening visualization and use of data.

Indexed as

Disease EradicationHumansMalariaPopulation SurveillancePrivate SectorPublic SectorEliminationMalariaSurveillanceSurveillance system

Identifiers

PMID31533740
PMCPMC6751607
OpenAlexW2974446554

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.