Observational studyScientific reports2026
Efficacy of artemether lumefantrine vs chloroquine for the treatment of Plasmodium Vivax infection in Pakistan.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advancement of malaria control is significant; yet, the presence of drug-resistant malarial parasites remains an issue. In Pakistan, nearly one million malaria cases occur each year. A prospective, observational, cohort study was conducted among 354 malaria patients in Karachi, Pakistan. By Day 28, recurrent Plasmodium vivax infection occurred in 10/98 (10.2%) of participants receiving chloroquine (CQ) monotherapy, 17/84 (20.2%) receiving artemether–lumefantrine (AL) monotherapy, 1/93 (1.1%) receiving CQ plus primaquine (CQ + PQ), and 3/79 (3.8%) receiving AL plus primaquine (AL + PQ). The corresponding Kaplan–Meier cumulative incidence estimates at Day 28 were 13.4% (95% CI 5.6–21.2), 24.5% (95% CI 14.3–34.7), 1.5% (95% CI 0.0–4.4), and 5.3% (95% CI 0.0–11.2), respectively. By the end of six months of follow-up, observed recurrence was 15/98 (15.3%) for CQ, 27/84 (32.2%) for AL, 1/93 (1.1%) for CQ + PQ, and 5/79 (6.3%) for AL + PQ; Kaplan–Meier cumulative incidence estimates were 21.0% (95% CI 11.0–31.0), 39.1% (95% CI 26.7–51.4), 1.5% (95% CI 0.0–4.4), and 10.0% (95% CI 1.6–18.4), respectively. In unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models, AL monotherapy was associated with a higher hazard of recurrence than CQ monotherapy, while primaquine-containing regimens showed lower recurrence hazards than the corresponding monotherapies during follow-up.
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.