Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25652120›Full record

Trial reportParasites & vectors2015

Quality control in the diagnosis of Trichuris trichiura and Ascaris lumbricoides using the Kato-Katz technique: experience from three randomised controlled trials.

Benjamin Speich, Said M Ali, Shaali M Ame, Marco Albonico, Jürg Utzinger, Jennifer Keiser

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Parasites & vectors, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Diagnostic sensitivity of formalin-fixed faecal microscopy for the detection of soil-transmitted helminths.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Benjamin SpeichDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland. benjamin.speich@unibas.ch.
Said M AliLaboratory Division, Public Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, Chake Chake, Tanzania. saidmali2003@yahoo.com.
Shaali M AmeLaboratory Division, Public Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, Chake Chake, Tanzania. shaaliame@yahoo.com.
Marco AlbonicoIvo de Carneri Foundation, Milan, Italy. albonico@tin.it.
Jürg UtzingerUniversity of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. juerg.utzinger@unibas.ch.
Jennifer KeiserDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland. jennifer.keiser@unibas.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn accurate diagnosis of soil-transmitted helminthiasis is important for individual patient management, for drug efficacy evaluation and for monitoring control programmes. The Kato-Katz technique is the most widely used method detecting soil-transmitted helminth eggs in faecal samples. However, detailed analyses of quality control, including false-positive and faecal egg count (FEC) estimates, have received little attention.

methodsOver a 3-year period, within the frame of a series of randomised controlled trials conducted in Pemba, United Republic of Tanzania, 10% of randomly selected Kato-Katz thick smears were re-read for Trichuris trichiura and Ascaris lumbricoides eggs. In case of discordant result (i.e. positive versus negative) the slides were re-examined a third time. A result was assumed to be false-positive or false-negative if the result from the initial reading did not agree with the quality control as well as the third reading. We also evaluated the general agreement in FECs between the first and second reading, according to internal and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.

resultsFrom the 1,445 Kato-Katz thick smears subjected to quality control, 1,181 (81.7%) were positive for T. trichiura and 290 (20.1%) were positive for A. lumbricoides. During quality control, very low rates of false-positive results were observed; 0.35% (n = 5) for T. trichiura and 0.28% (n = 4) for A. lumbricoides. False-negative readings of Kato-Katz thick smears were obtained in 28 (1.94%) and 6 (0.42%) instances for T. trichiura and A. lumbricoides, respectively. A high frequency of discordant results in FECs was observed (i.e. 10.0-23.9% for T. trichiura, and 9.0-11.4% for A. lumbricoides).

conclusionsOur analyses show that the rate of false-positive diagnoses of soil-transmitted helminths is low. As the probability of false-positive results increases after examination of multiple stool samples from a single individual, the potential influence of false-positive results on epidemiological studies and anthelminthic drug efficacy studies should be determined. Existing WHO guidelines for quality control might be overambitious and might have to be revised, specifically with regard to handling disagreements in FECs.

Indexed as

Parasite Egg CountAnimalsAscariasisAscaris lumbricoidesChildFecesFemaleHumansMaleQuality ControlTanzaniaTrichuriasisTrichuris

Identifiers

PMID25652120
PMCPMC4326492

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.