ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Approaches to quantifying acceptability of pharmaceutical interventions for neglected tropical diseases: A scoping review.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Measuring acceptability is important in the context of pharmaceutical and public health interventions, since it can have an impact on uptake - a factor that extends beyond the safety and efficacy of the intervention. This scoping review aimed to explore how the acceptability of pharmaceutical interventions for neglected tropical diseases has been quantitatively measured in the literature to inform advancement towards a standardized methodology. A systematic search across five databases identified 1340 articles, of which 40 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty articles (50%) were published in the last five years, between 2020 and 2025. Fourteen articles measured acceptability using multiple questions, with nine establishing a threshold for acceptability. Twenty-two articles assessed acceptability using a single question, while four articles reported measuring acceptability but did not provide details about their methodology. Notably, mass drug administration programs targeting preventive chemotherapy for neglected tropical diseases comprised most studies (18/40), yet these studies utilized 9 distinct approaches to measure acceptability, despite their similar implementation strategies. Nearly a third of the articles (13/40) stated that they measured acceptability, however their methodology revealed that they were measuring coverage (received treatment) and compliance (swallowed treatment). Given that acceptability is one of the seven considerations informing World Health Organization guideline recommendations, a standardized method to quantify this multifaceted attribute is essential. As more studies on acceptability are being published in recent years, the lack of standardization becomes increasingly concerning. This review underscores the urgent need for such methodologies to generate reliable, comparable data for research and policymaking.
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.