ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2020
Evaluation of Implementation of Intermittent Screening and Treatment for Control of Malaria in Pregnancy in Jharkhand, India.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Malaria in pregnancy in India: a 50-year bird's eye.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated intermittent screening and treatment during pregnancy (ISTp) for malaria using rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) at antenatal care (ANC) compared with passive case detection within the routine health system. The mixed-method evaluation included two cross-sectional household surveys (pre- and post-implementation of ISTp), in-depth interviews with health workers, and focus group discussions (FGDs) with pregnant women. Differences in proportions between surveys for a number of outcomes were tested; 553 and 534 current and recently pregnant women were surveyed (pre- and post-implementation, respectively). In-depth interviews were conducted with 29 health providers, and 13 FGDs were held with pregnant women. The proportion of pregnant women who received an RDT for malaria at ANC at least once during their pregnancy increased from pre- to post-implementation (19.2%; 95% CI: 14.9, 24.3 versus 42.5%; 95% CI: 36.6, 48.7;
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.