Skip to main content
Fig. 2 | Malaria Journal

Fig. 2

From: Effectiveness of in-service training plus the collaborative improvement strategy on the quality of routine malaria surveillance data: results of a pilot study in Kayunga District, Uganda

Fig. 2

A–D Effect of TCI on A data completeness, all fields; B data completeness, clinically-relevant fields; C the relative difference (absolute value) between the OPD register and monthly reports for total malaria cases; D relative difference (absolute value) in test positivity rate based on the laboratory register data versus monthly reports. The graphs in AD show three segments: (1) baseline, (2) scale-up of TCI and the revised forms (excluded from analysis), and (3) a period reflecting the effect of TCI and the revised forms followed by a short-term post-intervention sustainability assessment (post-TCI). The timing of the learning sessions (LS): LS1—focus on completeness; LS2—focus on accuracy through concordance of data sources; LS3—focus on data elements for calculation of standard malaria indicators); the harvest meeting (HM) completes the intervention period. Improvement in data quality is represented by positive effects sizes for completeness indicators (as the goal is 100% completeness) and negative effect sizes for accuracy indicators (as the goal is no discordance). TCI in-service training plus collaborative improvement, LS learning session, HM harvest meeting. Solid lines are based on the segmented regression model. The dashed line represents the counterfactual (an extension of the baseline trend into the follow-up period)

Back to article page