Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23556017›Full record

Trial reportPLoS neglected tropical diseases2013

Analysis of Schistosomiasis haematobium infection prevalence and intensity in Chikhwawa, Malawi: an application of a two part model.

Michael G Chipeta, Bagrey Ngwira, Lawrence N Kazembe

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Prevalence and correlates ofThe Pan African medical journal · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Prevalence ofAfrican health sciences · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The Pan African medical journal · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Michael G ChipetaMalawi Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi. mikechipeta@yahoo.co.uk
Bagrey Ngwira
Lawrence N Kazembe
University of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Malawi · MWUniversity of Namibia · NA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary Schistosomiasis infection, a common cause of morbidity especially among children in less developed countries, is measured by the number of eggs per urine. Typically a large proportion of individuals are non-egg excretors, leading to a large number of zeros. Control strategies require better understanding of its epidemiology, hence appropriate methods to model infection prevalence and intensity are crucial, particularly if such methods add value to targeted implementation of interventions.

methodsWe consider data that were collected in a cluster randomized study in 2004 in Chikhwawa district, Malawi, where eighteen (18) villages were selected and randomised to intervention and control arms. We developed a two-part model, with one part for analysis of infection prevalence and the other to model infection intensity. In both parts of the model we adjusted for age, sex, education level, treatment arm, occupation, and poly-parasitism. We also assessed for spatial correlation in the model residual using variogram analysis and mapped the spatial variation in risk. The model was fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The study had a total of 1642 participants with mean age of 32.4 (Standard deviation: 22.8), of which 55.4 % were female. Schistosomiasis prevalence was 14.2 %, with a large proportion of individuals (85.8 %) being non-egg excretors, hence zero-inflated data. Our findings showed that S. haematobium was highly localized even after adjusting for risk factors. Prevalence of infection was low in males as compared to females across all the age ranges. S. haematobium infection increased with presence of co-infection with other parasite infection. Infection intensity was highly associated with age; with highest intensity in school-aged children (6 to 15 years). Fishing and working in gardens along the Shire River were potential risk factors for S. haematobium infection intensity. Intervention reduced both infection intensity and prevalence in the intervention arm as compared to control arm. Farmers had high infection intensity as compared to non farmers, despite the fact that being a farmer did not show any significant association with probability of infection. These results evidently indicate that infection prevalence and intensity are associated with risk factors differently, suggesting a non-singular epidemiological setting. The dominance of agricultural, socio-economic and demographic factors in determining S. haematobium infection and intensity suggest that disease transmission and control strategies should continue centring on improving socio-economic status, environmental modifications to control S. haematobium intermediate host snails and mass drug administration, which may be more promising approaches to disease control in high intensity and prevalence settings.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnthelminticsChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMalawiMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalPrevalenceRisk FactorsAnthelmintics

Identifiers

PMID23556017
PMCPMC3605235
OpenAlexW1974884843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.