ArticleMalaria journal2023
A mixed methods study assessing the adoption potential of a saliva-based malaria rapid test in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Article in Malaria journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- "It doesn't require blood!": Perceptions around non-invasive malaria testing tools in Indonesia, Peru, and Rwanda.PloS one · 2026Article
- Evaluation ofiScience · 2025Article
- Enhancing national cholera surveillance using rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs): A mixed methods evaluation.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe reliance on blood for thin and thick blood smear microscopy-using a relatively invasive procedure has presented challenges to the use of reliable diagnostic tests in non-clinical settings at the point-of-need (PON). To improve the capacity of non-blood-based rapid diagnostic tests to confirm subclinical infections, and thereby identify and quantify the human reservoir at the PON, a cross-sectoral collaboration between university researchers and commercial partners produced an innovative, non-invasive saliva-based RDT capable of identifying novel, non-hrp2/3 parasite biomarkers. While this new saliva-based malaria asymptomatic and asexual rapid test (SMAART-1) shows increased detection sensitivity and precision potential by identifying a new P. falciparum protein marker (PSSP17), appraising its utility in the field-particularly with respect to its adoption potential with children and adults in high risk, endemic regions-is necessary to warrant its continued development.
methodsThe purpose of this study was to assess the acceptability and adoption potential of the SMAART-1 at select PON sites in the Kinshasa Province. Teachers, community health workers, nurses, and laboratory technicians participated in data collection at three distinct community sites in Kinshasa Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Three data collection methods were utilized in this mixed methods study to provide an overarching acceptability evaluation of the SMAART-1 at PON field sites: observation checklists of SMAART-1 implementation, focus group discussions, and surveys with local health care practitioners-particularly teachers and community health workers.
resultsFindings indicate participants were interested in and supportive of the SMAART-1 protocol, with approximately 99% of the participants surveyed indicating that they either "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the statement that they "would use the saliva-based malaria asymptomatic rapid test as part of a community malaria detection and treatment programme." Data also suggest that the protocol was broadly appealing for its testing sensitivity and ease of use.
conclusionsThe SMAART-1 protocol's clinically reliable results demonstrate a promising new level of sensitivity and precision for detecting parasite biomarkers. This study's mixed-methods assessment of the protocol's utility and adoption potential in the field, with a target user audience, advances its development and points to opportunities to formalize and expand evaluation efforts.
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.