ArticleMalaria journal2026
"We are not sick, so why take medicine?" Community perspectives on barriers, facilitators, and implementation strategies for IPTsc in Ghana.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntermittent preventive treatment for school-aged children (IPTsc) is a newly recommended malaria chemoprevention strategy targeting populations that increasingly sustain malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. Ghana recently added IPTsc into its national malaria strategy, yet evidence on community acceptability and implementation strategies in non-trial settings remains limited. This study explored perceived barriers, facilitators, and preferred implementation strategies for IPTsc in a high-transmission district in Ghana.
methodsAn exploratory qualitative study was conducted in four junior high schools in the Hohoe Municipality. Data were collected through five focus group discussions (FGDs), comprising four FGDs with school-aged children and one FGD with caregivers. Additionally, three key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with two headteachers and the municipal School Health Education Programme coordinator. Transcripts were analysed using Attride-Stirling's thematic network analysis framework.
resultsPerceived barriers included concerns about drug origin, fear of side effects, administering medicines to asymptomatic children, tablet size and taste, and doubts about programme continuity. Facilitators centred on perceived benefits such as reduced malaria episodes, improved school attendance, lower household treatment costs, and community willingness to support IPTsc if adequate sensitisation was provided. Preferred implementation strategies included school-based delivery complemented by community outreach, administration by trained health professionals, clear communication on drug timing and food intake, and early parental involvement.
conclusionIn this setting, perceived acceptability of IPTsc was shaped less by doubts about effectiveness and more by concerns about trust, safety, delivery, and programme continuity. These findings suggest that context-sensitive IPTsc implementation in similar high-transmission settings should prioritise community engagement, involvement of health professionals, and adaptive delivery models that link schools with community health platforms.
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.