ArticlePloS one2023
Service availability and readiness of malaria surveillance information systems implementation at primary health centers in Indonesia.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the most important indicators in malaria eradication is the malaria surveillance information system (SISMAL) for recording and reporting medical cases. This paper aims to describe the availability and readiness of SISMALs at primary health centers (PHCs) in Indonesia. A cross-sectional survey was implemented in seven provinces for this study. The data was analyzed using bivariate, multivariate, and linear regression. The availability of the information system was measured by assessing the presence of the electronic malaria surveillance information system (E-SISMAL) at the studied PHCs. The readiness was measured by averaging each component of the assessment. From 400 PHC samples, only 58.5% had available SISMALs, and their level of readiness was only 50.2%. Three components had very low levels of readiness: (1) the availability of personnel (40.9%), (2) SISMAL integration and storage (50.2%), and (3) the availability of data sources and indicators (56.8%). Remote and border (DTPK) areas had a 4% better readiness score than non-DTPK areas. Endemic areas were 1.4% better than elimination areas, while regions with low financial capacity were 3.78% better than regions with high financial capacity, with moderate capacity (2.91%). The availability rate of the SISMAL at PHCs is only 58.5%. Many PHCs still do not have SISMALs. The readiness of the SISMAL at these PHCs is significantly related to DTPK/remote area, high endemicity status, and low financial capacity. This study found that the implementation of SISMAL is more accessible to malaria surveillance for the remote area and regions with low financial capacity. Therefore, this effort will well-fit to address barrier to malaria surveillance in developing countries.
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.