ArticleMalaria journal2022
Forest malaria and prospects for anti-malarial chemoprophylaxis among forest goers: findings from a qualitative study in Thailand.
Article in Malaria journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Topical repellents for malaria prevention.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Assessing receptivity to malaria using case surveillance and forest data in a near-elimination setting in northeast Thailand.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Mapping malaria transmission foci in Northeast Thailand from 2011 to 2021: approaching elimination in a hypoendemic area.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Progress towards malaria elimination in the Greater Mekong Subregion: perspectives from the World Health Organization.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Forest-goers as a heterogeneous population at high-risk for malaria: a case-control study in Aceh Province, Indonesia.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Early warning systems for malaria outbreaks in Thailand: an anomaly detection approach.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Expanding the roles of malaria post workers in Thailand: A qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Sustaining village malaria worker programmes with expanded roles: Perspectives of communities, healthcare workers, policymakers, and implementers in Vietnam.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Applying the COM-B behavior model to inform the delivery of spatial repellents and insecticide-treated clothing among forest exposed populations in Mondulkiri Province, Cambodia.Research square · 2023Article
- Environmental Factors Linked to Reporting of Active Malaria Foci in Thailand.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Understanding work-related travel and its relation to malaria occurrence in Thailand using geospatial maximum entropy modelling.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Seroepidemiological surveillance, community perceptions and associated risk factors of malaria exposure among forest-goers in Northeastern Thailand.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
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 4 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcross the Greater Mekong Subregion, malaria remains a dangerous infectious disease, particularly for people who visit forested areas where residual transmission continues. Because vector control measures offer incomplete protection to forest goers, chemoprophylaxis has been suggested as a potential supplementary measure for malaria prevention and control. To implement prophylaxis effectively, additional information is needed to understand forest goers' activities and their willingness to use malaria prevention measures, including prophylaxis, and how it could be delivered in communities. Drawing on in-depth interviews with forest goers and stakeholders, this article examines the potential acceptability and implementation challenges of malaria prophylaxis for forest goers in northeast Thailand.
methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with forest goers (n = 11) and stakeholders (n = 16) including healthcare workers, community leaders, and policymakers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded using NVivo, employing an inductive and deductive approach, for thematic analysis.
resultsForest goers were well aware of their (elevated) malaria risk and reported seeking care for malaria from local health care providers. Forest goers and community members have a close relationship with the forest but are not a homogenous group: their place and time-at-risk varied according to their activities and length of stay in the forest. Among stakeholders, the choice and cost of anti-malarial prophylactic regimen-its efficacy, length and complexity, number of tablets, potential side effects, and long-term impact on users-were key considerations for its feasibility. They also expressed concern about adherence to the preventive therapy and potential difficulty treating malaria patients with the same regimen. Prophylaxis was considered a low priority in areas with perceived accessible health system and approaching malaria elimination.
conclusionsIn the context of multi-drug resistance, there are several considerations for implementing malaria prophylaxis: the need to target forest goers who are at-risk with a clear period of exposure, to ensure continued use of vector control measures and adherence to prophylactic anti-malarials, and to adopt an evidence-based approach to determine an appropriate regimen. Beyond addressing current intervention challenges and managing malaria incidence in low-transmission setting, it is crucial to keep malaria services available and accessible at the village level especially in areas home to highly mobile populations.
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.