Rigor Reviewed

Rigor-Reviewed Manuscript

Chemoprevention for malaria with monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in pregnant women living with HIV on daily co-trimoxazole in Kenya and Malawi: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Name: Αlpha¹ Rigor Record — Chemoprevention for malaria with monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in pregnant women living with HIV on daily co-trimoxazole in Kenya and Malawi: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Item: Chemoprevention for malaria with monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in pregnant women living with HIV on daily co-trimoxazole in Kenya and Malawi: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Rating: 100
Author: Αlpha¹

Barsosio HC, Madanitsa M, Ondieki ED, Dodd J, Onyango ED, Otieno K, Wang D, Hill J, Mwapasa V, Phiri KS, Maleta K, Taegtmeyer M, Kariuki S, Schmiegelow C, Gutman JR, Ter Kuile FO

Paper source

Read full text (PMC)

Embed this Rigor badge

Αlpha¹ Rigor Review — 4★ (Strong), 0 critical, 0 high issues for “Chemoprevention for malaria with monthly intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in pregnant women living with HIV on daily co-trimoxazole in Kenya and Malawi: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.”

Links back to this Rigor Record.

Αlpha¹ Editorial

This rigor review was examined and confirmed by Αlpha¹ Editorial · August 16, 2026

Αlpha¹ Rigor Review

Rigor Reviewed

4 / 5

Strong — minor issues to address

Interventional Study

Critical

High-priority

How this rating was calculated▸

Started at 5★ — deductions

ClaimsEfficacy rests on an unvalidated surrogate endpoint−0.5★
ClaimsTreatment effect not shown to be clinically meaningful−0.5★

Model-reported confidence: highReviewer agreement: highEngine: 7.39.0Source: full text

Not verified in this report

The numeric-impossibility checks (GRIM/GRIMMER/DEBIT/SPRITE) did not run: 46 reported means were read, and their group size is not stated where the values are printed (this source has no machine-readable table structure). These checks need the count the mean was averaged over, so none was performed.

Problems surfaced2 types

Overstated conclusions2

Conclusions that reach past what the paper's own results support — including a significance claim that no longer holds when the statistic is recomputed, and efficacy resting on an unvalidated surrogate endpoint.

Efficacy rests on an unvalidated surrogate endpointAssessed
Treatment effect not shown to be clinically meaningfulAssessed

This Αlpha¹ Rigor Review uses AI Rigor Reviewers trained on a curated corpus of high-fidelity and retracted papers, with expert supervision and curation. It can still make mistakes; verify each finding against the source before relying on it.

This is a well-conducted and transparently reported phase 3 randomised controlled trial. The design is rigorous, statistical analysis is sound, and ethical approvals and data sharing are adequately documented. Minor reporting gaps include lack of explicit CONSORT and Declaration of Helsinki statements, and a typo in a table footnote.

Both reviewers classified the study as interventional, and I adopted that. The evaluation covered all eight dimensions; several sub-criteria were marked not applicable for a human drug trial (e.g., cell line authentication, housing conditions). The statistics verification covered only a subset of reported tests (those with test statistics/df or effect estimates with CIs); threshold-only p-values and resampling-based p-values were not machine-verified. The citation check found no retracted or unresolved references.

6 major claims checked against the paper's own evidence: all adequately supported.

Premise concern: surrogate not validated for clinical benefit; effect size not shown to be clinically meaningful.

Recomputed 16 tests: 16 consistent, 0 inconsistent; 6 recomputed directly from the reported test statistics, 10 via agent-written checks.

Reporting

Eight Dimensions8 pass

The introduction cites prior trials of IPTp with mefloquine and the Ugandan pilot study with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, acknowledging their limitations (poor tolerability, drug-drug interactions, inconclusive results). The rationale linking the premise to the study objectives is explicit, and the study addresses prior limitations by using dolutegravir-based cART and a larger, adequately powered design.

Sub-criteria

prior work citedADEQUATE

premise rationaleADEQUATE

limitations addressedADEQUATE

Per reviewer (2) — the votes behind the verdict

PASSReviewer 1· 95% conf

The study clearly establishes the scientific premise, citing prior research on the threat of antifolate resistance and the need for alternative IPTp, and provides a logical rationale for the trial.

Evidence

paraphrase[Introduction, paragraphs 2-4]

“Two trials that added IPTp with mefloquine to daily co-trimoxazole in areas with high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance in women living with HIV on nevirapine-based or efavirenz-based combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) showed the superiority of the combination in reducing clinical malaria and placental malaria compared with daily co-trimoxazole alone.”

paraphrase[Introduction, final paragraph]

“We present the results of a trial designed to determine whether addition of monthly IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine to daily co-trimoxazole is more effective at preventing malaria than the standard of care with daily co-trimoxazole alone in women receiving dolutegravir-based cART in areas with high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance.”

paraphrase[Introduction, paragraphs 3-4]

“The study was inconclusive. The combination of daily co-trimoxazole plus monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was well tolerated, but no reduction in Plasmodium infections was achieved, likely because of reduced malaria transmission in the study area after the introduction of indoor residual spraying, and a clinically relevant drug-drug interaction between dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and efavirenz resulting in a 27% reduction in exposure to dihydroartemisinin and 38% reduction in exposure to piperaquine.”

PASSReviewer 2· 95% conf

The study clearly establishes the scientific premise, citing prior research on the threat of antifolate resistance and the need for alternative IPTp, and provides a logical rationale for the trial.

Evidence

paraphrase[Introduction, paragraphs 2-4]

paraphrase[Introduction, final paragraph]

paraphrase[Introduction, paragraph 4]

“Unlike efavirenz, no clinically relevant drug-drug interactions have been seen between dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine and dolutegravir in pregnancy.”

Randomisation used computer-generated permuted blocks, stratified by site and HIV status, with allocation concealment via sealed envelopes. Blinding was comprehensive (participants, investigators, laboratory staff, data analysts). The sample size calculation is reported (80% power, 50% reduction, 898 participants). Inclusion/exclusion criteria are detailed. The modified ITT and safety populations are defined, and missing data handling (non-responder imputation) is described. As a human RCT, replicate_distinction, controls, and independent_replication are not applicable.

Sub-criteria

controlsN/A

power analysisADEQUATE

blinding levelsADEQUATE

outlier handlingADEQUATE

randomization unitADEQUATE

inclusion exclusionADEQUATE

randomization methodADEQUATE

replicate distinctionN/A

independent replicationN/A

Per reviewer (2) — the votes behind the verdict

PASSReviewer 1· 95% conf

The trial design is rigorous: individually randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, with adequate sample size, pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria, and a clear primary analysis population.

Evidence

direct quote[Methods, Randomisation and masking]

“Balanced randomisation was done using computer-generated permuted block randomisation stratified by site and HIV status (women diagnosed with HIV before enrolment as documented in their existing health records [ie, known positive] vs newly diagnosed).”