Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug 12;23(1):241.
doi: 10.1186/s12936-024-05050-6.

Contextual factors and G6PD diagnostic testing: a scoping review and evidence and gap map

Affiliations

Contextual factors and G6PD diagnostic testing: a scoping review and evidence and gap map

Timothy Hugh Barker et al. Malar J. .

Abstract

Background: Testing for glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is an important consideration regarding treatment for malaria. G6PD deficiency may lead to haemolytic anaemia during malaria treatment and, therefore, determining G6PD deficiency in malaria treatment strategies is extremely important.

Methods: This report presents the results of a scoping review and evidence and gap map for consideration by the Guideline Development Group for G6PD near patient tests to support radical cure of Plasmodium vivax. This scoping review has investigated common diagnostic tests for G6PD deficiency and important contextual and additional factors for decision-making. These factors include six of the considerations recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) handbook for guideline development as important to determining the direction and strength of a recommendation, and included 'acceptability', 'feasibility,' 'equity,' 'valuation of outcomes,' 'gender' and 'human rights'. The aim of this scoping review is to inform the direction of future systematic reviews and evidence syntheses, which can then better inform the development of WHO recommendations regarding the use of G6PD deficiency testing as part of malaria treatment strategies.

Results: A comprehensive search was performed, including published, peer-reviewed literature for any article, of any study design and methodology that investigated G6PD diagnostic tests and the factors of 'acceptability', 'feasibility,' 'equity,' 'valuation of outcomes,' 'gender' and 'human rights'. There were 1152 studies identified from the search, of which 14 were determined to be eligible for inclusion into this review. The studies contained data from over 21 unique countries that had considered G6PD diagnostic testing as part of a malaria treatment strategy. The relationship between contextual and additional factors, diagnostic tests for G6PD deficiency and study methodology is presented in an overall evidence and gap, which showed that majority of the evidence was for the contextual factors for diagnostic tests, and the 'Standard G6PD (SD Biosensor)' test.

Conclusions: This scoping review has produced a dynamic evidence and gap map that is reactive to emerging evidence within the field of G6PD diagnostic testing. The evidence and gap map has provided a comprehensive depiction of all the available literature that address the contextual and additional factors important for decision-making, regarding specific G6PD diagnostic tests. The majority of data available investigating the contextual factors of interest relates to quantitative G6PD diagnostic tests. While a formal qualitative synthesis of this data as part of a systematic review is possible, the data may be too heterogenous for this to be appropriate. These results can now be used to inform future direction of WHO Guideline Development Groups for G6PD near patient tests to support radical cure of P. vivax malaria.

Keywords: Contextual factors; Evidence; G6PD; Gaps; Malaria; Mapping; Scoping review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This work is funded by the World Health Organization, APW203270267. All rights in all work performed under this APW, including, without limitation, the report and database, shall be vested in WHO. The Contractual Partner can present and discuss work undertaken under this agreement in university seminars, tutorials, and lectures, but will need to inform WHO of any specific plans to do so and share the materials that will be presented.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Evidence and gap map for G6PD diagnostic tests and contextual/additional factors of interest, according to the methodology that the study employed
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Number of studies that provided data related to a G6PD test and a contextual factor or additional factor of interest, according to the studies country of origin
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Number of studies that provided data for a specific contextual factor or additional factor of interest
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Number of studies that provided data for a specific diagnostic test for G6PD deficiency
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Number of studies according to the study methodology they employed to collect their data
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Number of questionnaires or surveys that employed close- or open-ended questions
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Number of studies that employed focus groups, 1-on-1 interviews, or both in their design

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Peters AL, Van Noorden CJ. Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency and malaria: cytochemical detection of heterozygous G6PD deficiency in women. J Histochem Cytochem. 2009;57:1003–11. 10.1369/jhc.2009.953828 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mason PJ, Bautista JM, Gilsanz F. G6PD deficiency: the genotype-phenotype association. Blood Rev. 2007;21:267–83. 10.1016/j.blre.2007.05.002 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ashley EA, Recht J, White NJ. Primaquine: the risks and the benefits. Malar J. 2014;13:418. 10.1186/1475-2875-13-418 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. WHO. Handbook for guideline development. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
    1. Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl EA, Davoli M, et al. GRADE evidence to decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: introduction. BMJ. 2016. 10.1136/bmj.i2016. 10.1136/bmj.i2016 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources