Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26492528›Full record

ReviewPLoS neglected tropical diseases2015

The Case for Mass Treatment of Intestinal Helminths in Endemic Areas.

Joan Hamory Hicks, Michael Kremer, Edward Miguel

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. A life without worms.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Don't Shoot the Messenger.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joan Hamory HicksCenter for Effective Global Action, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
Michael KremerDepartment of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Edward MiguelCenter for Effective Global Action, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
Center for Effective Global Action · USHarvard University · USUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two articles published earlier this year in the International Journal of Epidemiology [1,2] have re-ignited the debate over the World Health Organization's long-held recommendation of mass-treatment of intestinal helminths in endemic areas. In this note, we discuss the content and relevance of these articles to the policy debate, and review the broader research literature on the educational and economic impacts of deworming. We conclude that existing evidence still indicates that mass deworming is a cost-effective health investment for governments in low-income countries where worm infections are widespread.

Indexed as

Endemic DiseasesAnthelminticsCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug TherapyGlobal HealthHealth PolicyHelminthiasisHumansIntestinal Diseases, ParasiticWorld Health OrganizationAnthelmintics

Identifiers

PMID26492528
PMCPMC4619642
OpenAlexW2116846321

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.