IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0002957.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defining a malaria diagnostic pathway from innovation to adoption: Stakeholder perspectives on data and evidence gaps

Author

Listed:
  • Bryony Simmons
  • Elisa Sicuri
  • Jane Carter
  • Asrat Hailu
  • Francois Kiemde
  • Petra Mens
  • Davis Mumbengegwi
  • Bakri Nour
  • René Paulussen
  • Henk Schallig
  • Halidou Tinto
  • Norbert van Dijk
  • Lesong Conteh

Abstract

Malaria, a major global health concern, requires effective diagnostic tools for patient care, disease control, and elimination. The pathway from concept to the adoption of diagnostic products is complex, involving multiple steps and stakeholders. To map this process, our study introduces a malaria-specific diagnostic pathway, synthesising existing frameworks with expert insights. Comprising six major stages and 31 related activities, the pathway retains the core stages from existing frameworks and integrates essential malaria diagnostic activities, such as WHO prequalification processes, global stakeholder involvement, and broader health systems considerations. To understand the scope and availability of evidence guiding the activities along this pathway, we conducted an online survey with 113 participants from various stages of the malaria diagnostic pathway. The survey assessed perceptions on four critical attributes of evidence: clear requirements, alignment with user needs, accuracy and reliability, and public and free availability. It also explored the types of evidence used and the challenges and potential solutions related to evidence generation and use. Respondents reported using a broad range of formal and informal data sources. Findings indicated differing levels of agreement on the attributes across pathway stages, with notable challenges in the Approvals and Manufacturing stage and consistent concerns regarding the public availability of data/evidence. The study offers valuable insights for optimising evidence generation and utilisation across the malaria diagnostic pathway. It highlights the need for enhanced stakeholder collaboration, improved data availability, and increased funding to support effective evidence generation, sharing, and use. We propose actionable solutions, including the use of public data repositories, progressive data sharing policies, open-access publishing, capacity-building initiatives, stakeholder engagement forums, and innovative funding solutions. The developed framework and study insights have broader applications, offering a model adaptable for other diseases, particularly for neglected tropical diseases, which face similar diagnostic challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Bryony Simmons & Elisa Sicuri & Jane Carter & Asrat Hailu & Francois Kiemde & Petra Mens & Davis Mumbengegwi & Bakri Nour & René Paulussen & Henk Schallig & Halidou Tinto & Norbert van Dijk & Lesong C, 2024. "Defining a malaria diagnostic pathway from innovation to adoption: Stakeholder perspectives on data and evidence gaps," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-19, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002957
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002957
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0002957
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0002957&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002957?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter J Hotez & Serap Aksoy & Paul J Brindley & Shaden Kamhawi, 2020. "World neglected tropical diseases day," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-4, January.
    2. repec:plo:pmed00:0030473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:plo:pone00:0239283 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002957. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.