Sensitivity of diagnostic tests for human soil-transmitted helminth infections: a meta-analysis in the absence of a true gold standard.

Reliable, sensitive and practical diagnostic tests are an essential tool in disease control programmes for mapping, impact evaluation and surveillance. To provide a robust global assessment of the relative performance of available diagnostic tools for the detection of soil-transmitted helminths, we conducted a meta-analysis comparing the sensitivities and the quantitative performance of the most commonly used copro-microscopic diagnostic methods for soil-transmitted helminths, namely Kato-Katz, direct microscopy, formol-ether concentration, McMaster, FLOTAC and Mini-FLOTAC. In the absence of a perfect reference standard, we employed a Bayesian latent class analysis to estimate the true, unobserved sensitivity of compared diagnostic tests for each of the soil-transmitted helminth species Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura and the hookworms. To investigate the influence of varying transmission settings we subsequently stratified the analysis by intensity of infection. Overall, sensitivity estimates varied between the different methods, ranging from 42.8% for direct microscopy to 92.7% for FLOTAC. The widely used double slide Kato-Katz method had a sensitivity of 74-95% for the three soil-transmitted helminth species at high infection intensity, however sensitivity dropped to 53-80% in low intensity settings, being lowest for hookworm and A. lumbricoides. The highest sensitivity, overall and in both intensity groups, was observed for the FLOTAC method, whereas the sensitivity of the Mini-FLOTAC method was comparable with the Kato-Katz method. FLOTAC average egg count estimates were significantly lower compared with Kato-Katz, while the compared McMaster counts varied. In conclusion, we demonstrate that the Kato-Katz and Mini-FLOTAC methods had comparable sensitivities. We further show that test sensitivity of the Kato-Katz method is reduced in low transmission settings.