Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17943810›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Environmental sanitary interventions for preventing active trachoma.

M Rabiu, M Alhassan, H Ejere

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Environmental sanitary interventions for preventing active trachoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  2. Epidemiology and control of trachoma: systematic review.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2010
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Social Sciences for the Prevention of Blindness.Tropical medicine and health · 2015
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

M RabiuNational Blindness and Low Vision Survey Project, No. 1 Golf Course Road, P. O. Box 503, Kaduna, Nigeria. mrabiu@hotmail.com
M Alhassan
H Ejere
Metropolitan Hospital · GRNational Eye Centre · NGNational Federation of the Blind · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrachoma is a major cause of avoidable blindness. It is responsible for about six million blind people worldwide, mostly in the poor communities of developing countries. One of the major strategies advocated for the control of the disease is the application of various environmental sanitary measures to such communities.

objectivesTo assess the evidence for the effectiveness of environmental sanitary measures on the prevalence of active trachoma in endemic areas. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials - CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2007), EMBASE (1980 to July 2007), LILACS (July 2007), reference list of trials and the Science Citation Index. We also contacted agencies, experts and researchers in trachoma control. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any form of environmental hygiene measures with no measure. These hygiene measures included fly control, provision of water and health education. Participants in the trials were people normally resident in the trachoma endemic areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Four trials met the inclusion criteria but meta-analysis was not conducted due to heterogeneity of the studies. MAIN

resultsTwo studies that assessed insecticide spray as a fly control measure found that trachoma is reduced by at least 55% to 61% with this measure compared to no intervention. However, another study did not find insecticide spray to be effective in reducing trachoma. One study found that another fly control measure, latrine provision, reduced trachoma by 29.5% compared to no intervention; this was, however, not statistically significantly different. Another study revealed that health education on personal and household hygiene reduced the incidence of trachoma such that the odds of reducing trachoma in the health education village was about twice that of the no intervention village. However, all the studies have some methodological concerns relating to concealment of allocation and non-consideration of clustering effect in data analysis. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe role of insecticide spray as a fly control measure in reducing trachoma remains unclear. Latrine provision as a fly control measure has not demonstrated significant trachoma reduction. Health education may be effective in reducing trachoma. There is a dearth of data to determine the effectiveness of all aspects of environmental sanitation in the control of trachoma.

Indexed as

AnimalsDipteraHealth EducationHumansInsect ControlInsecticidesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSanitationToilet FacilitiesTrachomaInsecticides

Identifiers

PMID17943810
OpenAlexW4232452935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.