ArticleParasites & vectors2015
Filariasis serosurvey, New Caledonia, South Pacific, 2013.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated Approaches to Surveillance of Lymphatic Filariasis and Other Infectious Diseases in the Pacific Islands.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Article
- The History of Bancroftian Lymphatic Filariasis in Australasia and Oceania: Is There a Threat of Re-Occurrence in Mainland Australia?Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymphatic filariasis (LF) is a major public health problem in the Pacific. As the global prevalence of infection was not known in New Caledonia (NC), a serosurvey study was conducted by determining the prevalence of circulating filarial antigens, as recommended by the World Health Organization.
findingsA cross sectional study on a 2 degree stratified sample was carried out from June to November 2013. Inclusion criteria were: individuals aged 2 to 80 y/o, who had been hospitalized or sought medical care for a non-infectious cause and who had been living in NC for more than 6 months. LF antigenic detection was performed using the immunocromatographic BinaxNOW filariasis card test (ICT). Among the 1,035 individuals tested, 7 were antigenic. The overall LF antigenic prevalence was 0.62% (CI 95% [0.60-0.63]). All patients were unrelated to each other; none of them presented clinical symptoms of LF. Four of the 7 ICT positive patients reported having travelled to LF endemic areas, 2 patients had never traveled outside NC and the last one had only traveled in non-endemic areas. For the 7 ICT positive patients, the research of microfilariae in blood smears and filarial DNA by PCR was negative.
conclusionThe prevalence of filarial antigenemia in NC is less than 1%, the threshold that defines the filarial endemic areas for WHO. Nevertheless, as two patients who had never travelled outside NC and one who had only travelled to non-endemic areas were antigenic, we cannot conclude that NC is totally free of LF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.