ArticleSSM - population health2015
The effect of deworming on early childhood development in Peru: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in SSM - population health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Public health deworming programmes for soil-transmitted helminths in children living in endemic areas.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Effects of deworming on child and maternal health: a literature review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2017Pooled it
- The effect of cumulative soil-transmitted helminth infections over time on child development: a 4-year longitudinal cohort study in preschool children using Bayesian methods to adjust for exposure misclassification.International journal of epidemiology · 2018Trial
- Adverse Events from a Randomized, Multi-Arm, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Mebendazole in Children 12-24 Months of Age.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2016Trial
- Mass deworming for improving health and cognition of children in endemic helminth areas: A systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2019Review
- Governance, organization, accountability and sustainability of a region-wide school-based deworming program in Loreto, Peru.Acta tropica · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a knowledge gap on the effect of early childhood deworming on development in low- and middle-income countries. This evidence is important in the critical window of growth and development before two years of age.
methodsA randomized controlled trial of the benefit, and optimal timing and frequency, of deworming on development was conducted in Iquitos, Peru. Children were enrolled during routine 12-month growth and development visits and randomly allocated to: (1) deworming at the 12-month visit and placebo at the 18-month visit; (2) placebo at the 12-month visit and deworming at the 18-month visit; (3) deworming at the 12 and 18-month visits; or (4) placebo at the 12 and 18-month visits. The Bayley Scales of Infant Development III was used to assess cognitive, language and motor skills at the 12 and 24-month visits. One-way ANOVA analyses used an intention-to-treat approach.
resultsBetween September 2011 and June 2012, 1760 children were enrolled. Attendance at the 24-month visit was 88.8% (
conclusionsAfter 12 months of follow-up, an overall benefit of deworming on cognition, language or fine motor development was not detected. Additional integrated child and maternal interventions should be considered to prevent developmental deficits in this critical period.
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.