Low prevalence of Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale mono-infections among children in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a population-based, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: In an effort to improve surveillance for epidemiological and clinical outcomes, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have become increasingly widespread as cost-effective and field-ready methods of malaria diagnosis. However, there are concerns that using RDTs specific to Plasmodium falciparum may lead to missed detection of other malaria species such as Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale. METHODS: Four hundred and sixty six samples were selected from children under 5 years old in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) who took part in a Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) in 2013-14. These samples were first tested for all Plasmodium species using an 18S ribosomal RNA-targeted real-time PCR; malaria-positive samples were then tested for P. falciparum, P. malariae and P. ovale using a highly sensitive nested PCR. RESULTS: The prevalence of P. falciparum, P. malariae and P. ovale were 46.6, 12.9 and 8.3 %, respectively. Most P. malariae and P. ovale infections were co-infected with P. falciparum-the prevalence of mono-infections of these species were only 1.0 and 0.6 %, respectively. Six out of these eight mono-infections were negative by RDT. The prevalence of P. falciparum by the more sensitive nested PCR was higher than that found previously by real-time PCR. CONCLUSIONS: Plasmodium malariae and P. ovale remain endemic at a low rate in the DRC, but the risk of missing malarial infections of these species due to falciparum-specific RDT use is low. The observed prevalence of P. falciparum is higher with a more sensitive PCR method.

Publication of comparative effectiveness research has not increased in high-impact medical journals, 2004-2013.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of increasing interest and investment in patient-centered research, this study sought to describe patterns of comparative effectiveness research (CER) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in pharmacologic intervention studies published in widely read medical journals from 2004-2013. DESIGN AND SETTING: We identified 2335 articles published in five widely read medical journals from 2004-2013 with ≥1 intervention meeting the US Food and Drug Administration's definitions for a drug, biologic, or vaccine. Six trained reviewers extracted characteristics from a 20% random sample of articles (468 studies). We calculated the proportion of studies with CER and PROs. Trends were summarized using locally-weighted means and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Of the 468 sampled studies, 30% used CER designs and 33% assessed PROs. The proportion of studies using CER designs did not meaningfully increase over the study period. However, we observed an increase in the use of PROs. CONCLUSIONS: Among pharmacological intervention studies published in widely read medical journals from 2004-2013, we identified no increase in CER. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials continue to be the dominant study design for assessing pharmacologic interventions. Increasing trends in PRO use may indicate greater acceptance of these outcomes as evidence for clinical benefit.