Trial reportPloS one2017
Treating village newcomers and travelers for trachoma: Results from ASANTE cluster randomized trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01767506 (A Surveillance and Azithromycin Treatment for Newcomers and Travelers Evaluation), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Surveillance and Azithromycin Treatment for Newcomers and Travelers Evaluation: The ASANTE Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stopping azithromycin mass drug administration for trachoma: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Pooled it
- When the Neighboring Village is Not Treated: Role of Geographic Proximity to Communities Not Receiving Mass Antibiotics for Trachoma.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023Trial
- Comparison of Methods for Assessing Chlamydia trachomatis Transmission Intensity: A Systematic Review.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2026Article
- Monitoring of Chlamydia trachomatis infection and antibodies in low-prevalence districts of Amhara, Ethiopia: Insights from a hyper-endemic trachoma region.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Lessons learned for surveillance strategies for trachoma elimination as a public health problem, from the evaluation of approaches utilised by Guinea worm and onchocerciasis programmes: A literature review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Review
- Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection and infectious load among pre-school aged children within trachoma hyperendemic districts receiving the SAFE strategy, Amhara region, Ethiopia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
TRIAL
designTrachoma is targeted for global elimination. Infection rates with Chlamydia trachomatis are higher in new arrivals to a community and in travelers who leave for extended periods, suggesting they are sources of re-infection. This community-randomized, clinical trial was designed to determine if a surveillance program that targeted newcomers and travelers, identified weekly, would result in more communities achieving levels of infection of ≤1%.
methods52 communities were randomly allocated 1:1 to the control (annual MDA alone if warranted) or intervention arm (annual MDA if warranted, plus a surveillance program to identify and treat newcomers and travelers). In each community, surveys were completed every six months on a random sample of 100 children ages 1-9 years for trachoma and infection. The primary outcome was the proportion of communities in the intervention arm, compared to the control arm, which had a prevalence of infection at ≤1% by 24 months. Registered: clinicaltrials.gov(NCT01767506).
resultsIntervention communities experienced an average of 110 surveillance events per month. At 24 months, 7 (27%) of 26 intervention communities achieved a prevalence of infection ≤1% compared to 4 (15%) of the 26 control communities (odds ratio = 2·6, 95%CI = 0·56-11·9). At 24 months, the average infection prevalence in the intervention communities was 4·8, compared to 6·9 in the control communities (p = ·06).
conclusionDespite surveillance programs for community newcomers and travelers, the proportion of intervention communities with a level of infection ≤1% was lower than expected and not significantly different from control communities.
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.