ArticleMalaria journal2026
The role of community co-designed interventions for malaria prevention and control in conflict-affected communities in Cameroon's Southwest and littoral regions.
Article in Malaria journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2022, Cameroon was ranked the 11th of the 11 high-burden countries responsible for 70% of the global malaria burden largely due to sustained conflict in the Southwest and Northwest regions since 2018. From May 2021 to April 2024, a mixed-methods study was conducted of three community-based, co-created interventions, a community dialogue approach called the Community Health Participatory Approach (CoHPA), community health workers (CHWs) supportive supervision, and health vouchers for treatment and transportation. The study involved formative, intervention and endline phases; the qualitative findings from the endline evaluation are presented here.
methodsA qualitative study of 189 host, displaced and returnee participants, involving nineteen focus group discussions (FGDs) with CHWs and separate female and male community groups, and, eighteen in-depth interviews (IDIs), with local councillors, community leaders, supervisors, district, and facility chiefs were conducted. The study compared perceptions of knowledge and attitudes to care-seeking, information and communication channels, community leadership roles and malaria service capacity and quality and care pathway functionality with formative research results. It further evaluated perceptions of the intervention process regarding fidelity, dose, adaptations, process, mediators, reach and recommendations. Data were analysed thematically using NVivo 14.
resultsCommunities perceived increased knowledge of malaria prevention and control, with challenges where insecurity reduced facility-based services. Participants described increased participation in community and household prevention activities. CHWs valued supervision. CHW and supervisor support to CoPHA increased trust in CHW services, reducing use of roadside drug sellers. Vouchers increased treatment access, timely referrals, although unsubsidized co-morbidities caused payment challenges. Community leaders questioned voucher sustainability.
conclusionInterventions were perceived to have improved prevention and health-seeking awareness and behaviours, community health service utilization and treatment access. Participants felt empowered to create and evaluate solutions.
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.