Receipt of seasonal malaria chemoprevention by age-ineligible children and associated factors in nine implementation states in Nigeria

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3142434/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Receipt of seasonal malaria chemoprevention by age-ineligible children and associated factors in nine implementation states in Nigeria

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3142434/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 30 Mar, 2024

Read the published version in Malaria Journal →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: As part of implementation quality standards, community distributors are expected to ensure that only age-eligible children (aged 3 – 59 months) receive seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) medicines during monthly campaigns. There is uncertainty about the extent to which SMC medicines are administered to ineligible children. This study therefore aimed to assess the magnitude of this occurrence, while exploring the factors associated with it across nine states where SMC was delivered in Nigeria during the 2022 round.

Methods: We extracted data from representative end-of-round SMC household surveys and analyzed data of 3,299 caregiver-child pairs sampled from nine SMC-implementing states in Nigeria. Prevalence of receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible children was described by child-, caregiver- and SMC-related factors. Mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to explore the factors associated with the occurrence.

Results: 30.30% (95% CI: 27.80 – 32.90) of ineligible children sampled received at least one dose of SMC medicines in 2022, the majority (60.60%) of whom were aged 5-6 years while the rest were aged 7-10 years. We observed higher odds of an age-ineligible child receiving SMC among caregivers who had poor knowledge of SMC age eligibility (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.24 – 2.57, p=0.002), compared with those who were knowledgeable of age eligibility. Higher odds of receipt of SMC were also found among age-ineligible children whose caregivers had higher confidence in the protective effect of SMC against malaria (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.3 – 4.2, p=0.007), compared with those whose caregivers were less confident. Conversely, ineligible children whose caregivers were older than 20 years had lower odds of receiving SMC than those whose caregivers were younger; with lower odds among children of caregivers aged 20-29 years (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28 – 0.81, p = 0.007), 30-39 years (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.24 – 0.69, p=0.001), and 40-49 years (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.29 – 0.91, p=0.024).

Conclusions: This study contributes important evidence on the magnitude of the receipt of SMC by age-ineligible children, while identifying individual and contextual factors associated with it. The findings provide potentially useful insights that can help inform and guide context-specific SMC implementation quality improvement efforts.

Malaria

seasonal malaria chemoprevention

coverage

eligibility

programme improvement

Malaria is a significant public health concern in Nigeria, with the country accounting for 38.4% of global malaria deaths in children under 5 years[1]. To reduce the burden of malaria in this age group, Nigeria adopted seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) as a malaria prevention strategy in 2014[2, 3]. SMC typically involves the intermittent administration of a combination of two antimalarial medicines – sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine (SPAQ) – to children aged 3–59 months during the peak malaria transmission season, typically coinciding with the rainy season [4]. This approach has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing malaria incidence, morbidity, and possibly mortality[4–6].

SMC is typically delivered door-to-door by community distributors, who are trained to determine the age of the child through birth certificate, immunization cards, or caregiver confirmation if those documents are not available. The first doses of SPAQ are administered through directly observed treatment (DOT)[7]. However, in low and middle – income countries, civil registration and identification systems are often underdeveloped[8–11]. Coupled with the high prevalence of malnutrition and stunting in regions with high malaria attack rates, determining children’s age with accuracy is therefore often challenging [6]. As a result, age-ineligible children, that is, those who are either too young or too old to receive SMC [12], may inadvertently receive SMC medicines. Moreover, because SMC is often regarded as a highly effective malaria prevention intervention within SMC target populations, community distributors may face pressure from caregivers to provide SPAQ to older children [13][14].The administration of SMC medicines to age-ineligible children is an important indicator of the quality of SMC delivery and can be used to track and identify implementation quality and fidelity gaps[15].Receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible children presents various challenges. The SPAQ tablets currently used in SMC are available in two age-based formulations: a lower-strength formulation for children 3-<12 months and a higher-strength formulation for children 12–59 months. If administered correctly, these formulations provide a high degree of protection from malaria for approximately 28 days[16]. For older children, the above formulations are unlikely to offer sufficient antimalarial drug concentrations in the blood to give protection for the entire 28-day cycle, and so are likely to contribute to the development of drug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria[17],[18]. Furthermore, the administration of medicines to children outside of the designated age range complicates the quantification of SPAQ needs and procurement, which can potentially lead to stock-outs and eligible children missing out on this life-saving intervention [19], [20]While evidence from routine SMC coverage surveys suggest that the administration of SMC to ineligible is common, the extent to which this happens remains uncertain as currently available evidence is based on routine coverage surveys which are often not powered to provide representative results on the proportions of ineligible children receiving SMC medicines. Moreover, there is little evidence on the factors influencing the administration of SMC medicines to ineligible children. This study therefore aims to assess the prevalence of the problem, while exploring the factors associated with it across nine states where SMC was delivered in Nigeria during the 2022 round. The findings of this study will be useful in guiding the development of strategies to improve the quality delivery of SMC in Nigeria, strengthenthe current evidence base, and provide additional datapoints for informing SMC programme improvements in similar implementation contexts.

Study design

The study is based on comprehensive end-of-round cross-sectional household surveys conducted in nine states where SMC was delivered in Nigeria in 2022.

Study setting

This study used data from SMC campaigns implemented in Bauchi, Borno, Kebbi, Kogi, Nasarawa, Oyo, Plateau, Sokoto States, and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja in 2022 (see Fig. 1 below). SMC was introduced in the FCT, Oyo state and some LGAs in Kogi state that year, whereas the other states and LGAs in Kogi state had previous experience of implementing SMC. Five monthly cycles were implemented in the FCT, Kogi, Nasarawa, Oyo, Plateau and 10 LGAs in Bauchi state, while four cycles were implemented in Borno, Kebbi, Sokoto and another 10 LGAs in Bauchi state. The five-cycle SMC round was implemented from early June to early October 2022 whereas the four-cycle round was delivered from late June to late September 2022. Around 10.72 million SMC eligible children aged 3–59 months were targeted across the eight states and the FCT in 2022.

Sampling and data collection process

Surveys were carried out after the last monthly SMC cycle by independent evaluators. A multistage cluster sampling technique was used to select households with SMC-eligible children aged 3–59 months. Surveys were intended to achieve a representative sample of the target population of eligible children at country level and state levels. Sampling protocols aimed to achieve a self-weighted sample with sampling units selected with probability proportional to size. Only at the last stage of sampling (i.e. at the compound level) was a constant number of eligible children (one child per household) selected. Older children aged 5–10 years, if present in sampled households, were randomly selected to estimate the degree to which ineligible children received SMC as a measure of implementation quality. The primary outcome was SMC coverage in age-ineligible children (proportion of age-ineligible children who received at least one dose of SMC medicines). Secondary outcomes included SMC adherence (receipt of the full three-day course), awareness, knowledge and confidence. Data were collected using structured questionnaires and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Independent variables included child-level factors, including age and sex; caregivers’ sociodemographic characteristics, such as age, sex, level of education, occupation status and SMC-specific outcomes such as caregivers’ SMC awareness, knowledge, and confidence. Household-level variables included mosquito net ownership, use of mosquito nets and indoor residual spraying. The study required a minimum sample size of 1475 caregiver-child pairs to be powered to 80%, at the 95% confidence level using a two-tailed test and 5% margin of error, to estimate the prevalence of SMC coverage among age-ineligible children (aged 5–10 years). This assumes SMC coverage of 20% among age-ineligible children, based on evidence from routine programme data. Data were pooled across all nine participating states to achieve the estimated sample size.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, by presenting the distributions of independent variables by the outcome variable. The distributions were expressed as frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and means and their standard deviations for continuous variables. Bivariate analyses were used to examine the crude association between each independent variable and receipt of SMC medicines by children aged 5–10 years. Mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of receipt of SMC medicines by age-ineligible children by examining the adjusted association between the outcome variable and child-, caregiver- and household-level covariates through mutual adjustment. Given the hierarchical nature of the data and to account for the clustering effect, we used a mixed-effects logistic regression approach in fitting the model, with random intercepts for cluster units (wards). Measures of association were presented as odds ratios (OR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI), with statistical significance considered at p-value < 0.05. We used the Akaike information criterion (AIC) to assess the goodness-of-fit of the model. Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) was applied to test for multicollinearity. Data analysis was performed using Stata statistical software (Version 16).

Ethical considerations

Ethical approval for the surveys was granted by the National Health Research Ethics Committee in Nigeria (NHREC Approval Number NHREC/01/01/2007-14/10/2022). Data were used in accordance with the NHREC’s ethics standards. Informed consent was obtained from all survey participants before data collection.

Figure 1 shows states where SMC delivered in 2022.

[Insert Fig. 1 here]

Our final analytic sample included data from a total 3,299 caregivers of age-ineligible children aged 5–10 years across the nine states without missing observations for any of the variables selected for analysis. The child-, caregiver- and household-level characteristics of study participants are shown in Table 1 below:

Table 1

Characteristics of participants and prevalence of receipt of SMC by ineligible children
Variables	Total (N = 3,299)		Received SMC
Variables	Number	%	Number	%	p-value
All children	3,299	100	1,000	30.3
Child age
5	365	11.1	306	83.8
6	915	27.7	300	32.8
7	779	23.6	195	25
8	584	17.7	96	16.4	< 0.001_**
9	456	13.8	62	13.6
10	200	6.1	41	20.5
Child sex
Female	1627	49.3	480	29.5	0.347
Male	1672	50.7	520	31.1
Caregiver age
less 20yrs	110	3.3	41	37.3	0.015_**
20-39yrs	2,673	81	778	29.1
40yrs and above	516	15.6	181	35.1
Caregiver gender
Female	2,944	89.2	861	29.2
Male	355	10.8	139	39.2	0.001_**
Caregiver literacy
No	1186	36	367	30.9
Yes	2,113	64	633	30	0.652
Caregiver level of education
None	725	22	208	28.7
Informal or religious education	838	25.4	305	36.4
Primary school	528	16	151	28.6
Secondary school	881	26.7	243	27.6	0.001_**
Higher education	327	9.9	93	28.4
Caregiver marital status
Not married	195	5.9	62	31.8	0.68
Married	3104	94.1	938	30.2
Caregiver occupation
Unemployed	1065	32.3	316	29.7	0.67
Eemployed	2234	67.7	684	30.6
Caregiver knowledge of purpose of SMC
No	232	8.6	64	27.6	0.561
Yes	2463	91.4	736	29.9	0.561
Caregiver confidence that SMC is effective in preventing malaria
No	104	3.9	16	15.4
Yes	2591	96.1	784	30.3	0.005**
Community distributor observed DOT
No	401	13.1	113	28.2
Yes	2657	86.9	856	32.2	0.156
Caregiver knew SMC age eligibility
No	268	9.9	94	35.1
Yes	2427	90.1	706	29.1	0.049

[Insert Table 1 here]

Prevalence of receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible children aged 5–10 years.

Table 1 presents the prevalence of SMC receipt among age-ineligible children by various child, caregiver and household variables. Among the 3,299 age-ineligible children analyzed, 1,000 (30.3%) received SMC medicines. The majority (60.6%) of children who received SMC were 5- and 6-year-olds. Receipt of SMC medicines was highest among children aged 5 years (83.8%), with the proportion of SMC recipients generally decreasing as children aged older.

Factors associated with the receipt of SMC medicines by age-ineligible children.

Table 2 and Fig. 2 present results of adjusted odds ratios across various child, caregiver and household-level factors included in the mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression model. Compared with five year-olds, children who were older than 5 years had significantly lower odds of receiving SMC medicines (six year-olds: OR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.045–0.102, p < 0.001; age seven year-olds: OR: 0.05, 95% CI: 0.03–0.068, p < 0.001; age eight year-olds: OR: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.018–0.045, p < 0.001; nine year-olds: OR: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.013–0.035, p < 0.001; 10 year-olds: OR: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.018–0.053, p < 0.001). Some caregiver-level characteristics were found to be significantly associated with the administration of SMC medicines to children who were age-ineligible for SMC. Age ineligible children of caregivers aged 20–39 years were less likely to receive SMC compared with those of younger caregivers aged less than 20 years (OR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.302–0.821, p = 0.006). Higher odds of receiving SMC medicines were found among children whose primary caregivers were male at the time of survey relative to those whose caregivers were female (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.317–2.378, p = 0.001). Similarly, age-ineligible children of caregivers with informal or religious education were more likely to receive SMC medicines compared with those whose children had no education or other forms of education.

Table 2

Results of multivariate logistic regression model of receipt of seasonal malaria chemoprevention by age-ineligible children and associated factors in nine States in Nigeria (n = 3,299)
	Crude measures of association		Adjusted measures of association
Variables	Crude odds ratio (95% CI)	p value	Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)	p value
Child age
5	Reference		Reference
6	0.06 (0.04–0.086)	< 0.001**	0.07 (0.046–0.102)	< 0.001**
7	0.04 (0.026–0.057)	< 0.001**	0.05 (0.03–0.069)	< 0.001**
8	0.02 (0.015–0.036)	< 0.001**	0.03 (0.018–0.045)	< 0.001**
9	0.02 (0.011–0.028)	< 0.001**	0.02 (0.013–0.035)	< 0.001**
10	0.03 (0.016–0.046)	< 0.001**	0.03 (0.018–0.053)	< 0.001**
Caregiver age
less 20yrs	Reference		Reference
20-39yrs	0.52 (0.322–0.85)	0.009**	0.5 (0.302–0.821)	0.006**
40yrs and above	0.71 (0.418–1.199)	0.199	0.64 (0.371–1.103)	0.108
Caregiver gender
Female	Reference		Reference
Male	1.83 (1.374–2.436)	0.001**	1.77 (1.317–2.378)	0.001**
Caregiver level of education
None	Reference		Reference
Informal or religious education	1.6 (1.218–2.114)	0.001**	1.47 (1.087–1.991)	0.020**
Primary school	1.05 (0.764–1.452)	0.751	0.98 (0.703–1.365)	0.012**
Secondary school	1.01 (0.758–1.338)	0.961	0.94 (0.695–1.271)	0.902
Higher education	1.11 (0.761–1.624)	0.585	0.99 (0.667–1.48)	0.687
Caregiver knew SMC age eligibility
No	Reference		Reference
Yes	0.52 (0.365–0.74)	< 0.001**	0.53 (0.372–0.765)	< 0.001**
Caregiver confidence that SMC is effective in preventing malaria
No	Reference		Reference
Yes	1.88 (1.031–3.426)	0.039**	2.01 (1.07–3.723)	0.030**

Some SMC-specific variables were found to be significantly associated with the administration of SMC medicines to children who were age-ineligible for SMC. Lower odds of age-ineligible children receiving SMC medicines were observed among caregivers who were knowledgeable of SMC age eligibility (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.372–0.765, p = 0.001), compared with those who were not knowledgeable of age eligibility. Conversely, higher odds of receipt of SMC medicines were found among age-ineligible children whose caregivers were more confident that SMC is effective in preventing malaria (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.070–3.723, p = 0.030), compared with those whose caregivers were less confident in SMC’s effectiveness in preventing malaria.

[Insert Table 2 here]

[Insert Fig. 2 here]

In addition to estimating the magnitude of receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible older children, our results show various child, caregiver and SMC-related factors associated with the issue using data collected during comprehensive end-of-round surveys in nine Nigerian states in 2022. We found that about a third of age-ineligible older children sampled received SMC medicines during the 2022 SMC campaigns. This finding lends support to available, though limited, evidence that the administration of SMC medicines to ineligible children is a common occurrence [14]. Administration of SMC medicines to children who do not meet the eligibility criteria for SMC based on their age has various implications and presents numerous challenges as outlined in the following sections.

As the current formulations and dosing of the medicines used in SMC campaigns in Nigeria are intended for children younger than five years, it is possible that administering those medicines to older children represents underdosing. Exposure of children to sub-optimal doses can contribute to the development of parasite resistance [16, 17]. If left unaddressed, this is likely to undermine the programmatic effectiveness of SMC and may weaken the level of confidence that communities have in SMC as a malaria preventive intervention. Our findings show that the majority of ineligible children who received SMC were aged 5 to 6 years. As with other medicines, pharmacometrics of SMC medicines depend primarily on children’s weight[21]. Hence, administration of SMC medicines to children that are just above the eligible age range, whose weight is therefore unlikely to be substantially higher, is less likely to constitute underdosing. Based on our findings and considering the little evidence that SMC may have contributed to the development of resistance in settings in the Sahel region of West and Central Africa[6], the observed trend of receipt of SMC predominantly by children aged 5 to 6 years may be less likely to pose a significant risk of development of drug resistance. The finding that about 40% of older children who received SMC medicines were much older than five years is, nonetheless, concerning giving the implications of sub-optimal dosing in those children. It is an intriguing finding that such a large proportion of much older children received SMC medicines despite the obvious age difference between them and under-5 children. However, such children may not be distinguishable from under-5 children by mere physical appearance, due to the prevalence of malnutrition and stunting in the study setting, and SMC community distributors’ difficulty in ascertaining children’s age due to absence of verifiable home-based birth and civil registration records [8–11].From an operational perspective, however, administering SMC medicines to ineligible children presents a substantial challenge, particularly in terms of ensuring the availability of sufficient SPAQ stock levels to reach the entire target population of eligible children. This has important implications for reaching and sustaining high target population coverage, while maintaining optimal levels of programmatic impact and effectiveness in SMC delivery settings. From an economic perspective, it is likely that administration of SMC medicines to ineligible children increases the cost of SMC and reduces its cost-effectiveness. This is because cost-effectiveness decreases if medicines are given to individuals who are unlikely to benefit, which may also result in a decrease of coverage among eligible children.

Our study has identified various child, caregiver and SMC-related factors that influence the receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible populations of older children. It found that children’s age, and caregivers’ characteristics like age, gender, level of education and employment status were significantly associated with the issue. These findings are consistent with previous evidence that caregiver gender, age and other sociodemographic characteristics can influence children’s uptake of preventive health services and health outcomes[22, 23]. The findings thus underscore the need for context-specific community engagement efforts in future SMC campaigns to be tailored to address these predisposing factors, such as by strengthening knowledge of SMC age eligibility and its importance among younger and male caregivers, and those in households with older children in the 5–6-year age range. These can be achieved by reinforcing the training of SMC community distributors and community engagement personnel; equipping them with the skills required for effective communication of information on SMC eligibility criteria, their importance and other SMC-related information; and improving their competence in tailoring communication strategies to specific household and community level contexts during SMC campaigns.

We found considerable relationships between SMC-specific variables and the receipt of SMC medicines by ineligible children. It is important to note in addition to challenges faced by community distributors in determining children’s exact age, administration of SMC medicines to ineligible children may also reflect the pressure from caregivers on community distributors to provide SMC medicines to older children, as supported by our finding of higher odds of receipt of SMC medicines among age-ineligible children whose caregivers were more confident in SMC’s effectiveness as a malaria prevention intervention. Additionally, it is likely that doses of SMC medicines left with caregivers by community distributors to administer to age eligible children on the subsequent two days following the first dose, were administered to older siblings and other older children in the household for the same reason. As acknowledged earlier, these present a substantial challenge for ensuring that the target population of eligible children are reached and that they receive the complete number of doses of SMC medicines.

To address these challenges, it is pertinent to improve the competence of community distributors in determining children’s age with available home-based records, such as by requesting birth certificates, immunization cards and medical prescriptions for a previous illness. Also, SMC personnel should be better trained on strict compliance with SMC eligibility criteria, even when under pressure to provide SMC medicines to ineligible children. It is also important that community distributors are able to determine children’s age in the absence of verifiable records. One strategy we have seen adopted in some of our implementation settings is the use of historical prompts to validate caregivers’ reports of children’s age. Findings also underscore the need for future SMC campaigns to improve and address gaps in caregivers’ knowledge of SMC age eligibility as illustrated by our findings of higher odds of age-ineligible children receiving SMC medicines among caregivers who were less knowledgeable of SMC age eligibility. This can be achieved through pre-cycle SMC awareness and sensitization campaigns, and by leveraging interactions of community distributors with caregivers to boost their confidence in the effectiveness of SMC while also strengthening their knowledge and perceptions regarding age eligibility and its importance.

Strengths and limitations

Our study is one of the earliest attempts to quantity the extent to which ineligible children are receiving SMC medicines. The large dataset used, and statistical power of our analyses are major merits of the study. The mixed-effects regression approach use in fitting the model, with random intercepts for cluster units (wards) has the advantage of being to appropriately model data with observations that are nested in hierarchical data as with the dataset used in our study, while helping to account for the potential for clustering effect[24]. Overall, our findings provide important evidence on the magnitude and factors associated with the problem, thereby providing useful insights that can help to guide the articulation and deployment of context-specific programme improvement strategies in future SMC campaigns.

A major limitation of the study is that our analytic sample may not be representative of the general population of children aged 5–10 years in the study setting, as ineligible children were sampled from households with SMC eligible children during the same. It is likely that the current estimates of receipt of SMC by ineligible children are overestimated given this consideration. As such, the findings may not have limited generalizability to the wider population of older children in the study setting or similar contexts. Another limitation is the survey’s reliance on self-reporting by caregivers for information about children’s receipt of SMC which are prone to social desirability and recall biases.

Implications for further research

Given these limitations, future assessments should consider a more representative sample of older children by sampling from households irrespective of whether they have SMC-eligible children or not. Further quantitative studies may need to assess factors influencing administration of SMC to age-ineligible children from the perspectives of other stakeholders such as community distributors. The findings also underscore the need for qualitative studies to explore and more deeply understand the individual and contextual factors associated with the administration of SMC medicines to children who are ineligible to receive the medicines. Furthermore, future research may also be needed to assess the impact of such occurrences on SMC coverage, adherence to the full three-day course, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and the prevalence of resistance markers.

This study contributes important evidence on the magnitude of the receipt of SMC by age-ineligible children, while identifying individual and contextual factors associated with it. Knowledge of SMC age eligibility, caregiver confident of SMC efficacy and SMC deliver under DOT are major factor that influence age-ineligible children receiving SMC. The findings provide potentially useful insights that can help inform and guide context-specific SMC implementation quality improvement efforts.

Author contributions

Taiwo Ibinaiye conceived the study, coordinated data collection, conducted the statistical analysis and drafted the manuscript. Olusola Oresanya, Chibuzo Oguoma, Kunle Rotimi, Ayodeji Balogun, Kevin Baker, and Adaeze Aidenagbon supported coordination of data collection in Nigeria and reviewed the final manuscript. Christian Rassi reviewed the final manuscript. Chuks Nnaji co-conceived the study, designed the surveys, prepared the data and provided overall supervision. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript and contributed substantively to its intellectual content.

Ethical Approval:

Consent to participate:

Consent participation and publication was received from all participants whose data appears in this study.

Competing interests:

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare

Funding:

This study was carried out as part of evaluation activities for Malaria Consortium’s SMC programme in Nigeria. The programme is funded using philanthropic donations received by Malaria Consortium, primarily as a result of being awarded Top Charity status by GiveWell (https://www.givewell.org/).

Availability of data and materials:

Data employed in this study are available from the authors upon reasonable request.

World Health Organization. World malaria report 2022. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.
Federal Ministry of Health. National Malaria Strategic Plan(2014-2020) [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2023 May 14]. Available from: https://www.health.gov.ng/doc/NMEP-Strategic-Plan.pdf
Ogbulafor N, Uhomoibhi P, Shekarau E, Nikau J, Okoronkwo C, Fanou NML, et al. Facilitators and barriers to seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) uptake in Nigeria: a qualitative approach. Malar J. 2023;22:120.
World Health Organization. WHO Policy Recommendation: Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention (SMC) for Plasmodium falciparum malaria control in highly seasonal transmission areas of the Sahel sub-region in Africa [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2023 Feb 27]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/337978/WHO-HTM-GMP-2012.02-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
World Health Organization (WHO). Seasonal malaria chemoprevention with sulfadoxine–pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine in children: a field guide, second edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
Baba E, Hamade P, Kivumbi H, Marasciulo M, Maxwell K, Moroso D, et al. Effectiveness of seasonal malaria chemoprevention at scale in west and central Africa: an observational study. The Lancet. 2020;396:1829–40.
Malaria Consortium. SMC Trainer Guide and Resources Toolkit Nigeria 2018-2020 [Internet]. 2018. Available from: https://www.malariaconsortium.org/gallery-file/06190852-31/smctrainerguideandresourcetoolkit_nigeria.pdf
Brito S, Corbacho A, Osorio R. Does birth under-registration reduce childhood immunization? Evidence from the Dominican Republic. Health Econ Rev. 2017;7:14.
Anaduaka US. Multilevel analysis of individual- and community-level determinants of birth certification of children under-5 years in Nigeria: evidence from a household survey. BMC Public Health. 2022;22:2340.
Yokobori Y, Obara H, Sugiura Y, Kitamura T. Gaps in the civil registration and vital statistics systems of low- and middle-income countries and the health sector’s role in improving the situation. Glob Health Med. 2021;3:243–5.
Wodon Q, Yedan A. Obstacles to birth registration in Niger: estimates from a recent household survey. J Health Popul Nutr. 2019;38:26.
Counihan H, Marasciulo M, Oguoma C, Rassi C, Roca-Feltrer A, Zoungrana Y, et al. Quantitative report on seasonal malaria chemoprevention supported by Malaria Consortium in 2020: Coverage and quality in Burkina Faso, Chad, Nigeria, and Togo. 2021;
Moukénet A, Donovan L, Honoré B, Baker K, Smith H, Richardson S, et al. Extending Delivery of Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention to Children Aged 5–10 Years in Chad: A Mixed-Methods Study. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2022;10:e2100161.
Moukénet A, Donovan L, Honoré B, Baker K, Smith H, Richardson S, et al. Extending Delivery of Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention to Children Aged 5–10 Years in Chad: A Mixed-Methods Study. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2022;10:e2100161.
de Cola MA, Marasciulo M, Moukenet A, Ibinaiye T, Rassi C, Roca-Feltrer A, et al. Sol Richardson, Epidemiologist, UK. 2019;
Duration of Protection against Malaria and Anaemia.pdf.
WHO-HTM-GMP-2012.02-eng.pdf.
Rann O, Sharland M, Long P, Wong ICK, Laverty AA, Bottle A, et al. Did the accuracy of oral amoxicillin dosing of children improve after British National Formulary dose revisions in 2014? National cross-sectional survey in England. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e016363.
Counihan H, Marasciulo M, Oguoma C, Rassi C, Roca-Feltrer A, Zoungrana Y. Taiwo Ibinaiye, Azoukalne Moukenet, Benoît Sawadogo.
Malaria Consortium. Seasonal malaria chemoprevention programme start-up guide [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2022 Mar 13]. Available from: https://www.malariaconsortium.org/media-downloads/677/Seasonal%20malaria%20chemoprevention%20programme%20start-up%20guide
Batchelor HK, Marriott JF. Paediatric pharmacokinetics: key considerations. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;79:395–404.
Sanders LM, Thompson VT, Wilkinson JD. Caregiver health literacy and the use of child health services. Pediatrics. 2007;119:e86-92.
Touray E, Barrow A, Kinteh B, Badjie M, Nget M, Touray J, et al. Childhood vaccination uptake and associated factors among children 12–23 months in rural settings of the Gambia: a community-based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:1740.
McNeish D, Kelley K. Fixed effects models versus mixed effects models for clustered data: Reviewing the approaches, disentangling the differences, and making recommendations. Psychol Methods. 2019;24:20–35.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 30 Mar, 2024

Read the published version in Malaria Journal →

Editorial decision: Revision requested
20 Nov, 2023
Reviews received at journal
09 Sep, 2023
Reviews received at journal
24 Aug, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
18 Aug, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
14 Aug, 2023
Reviewers invited by journal
14 Aug, 2023
Editor assigned by journal
07 Jul, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
07 Jul, 2023
First submitted to journal
05 Jul, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

Receipt of seasonal malaria chemoprevention by age-ineligible children and associated factors in nine implementation states in Nigeria

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Study design

Study setting

Sampling and data collection process

Statistical analysis

Ethical considerations

Results

Discussion

Strengths and limitations

Implications for further research

Conclusions

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1