ReviewParasites & vectors2018
Recovering parasites from mummies and coprolites: an epidemiological approach.
Review in Parasites & vectors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- First molecular data on the human roundworm Ascaris lumbricoides species complex from the Bronze and Iron Age in Hallstatt, Austria.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Reconstructing the history of helminth prevalence in the UK.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- The Contribution of Community Health Education to Sustainable Control of the Neglected Zoonotic Diseases.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Epidemiological insights from a large-scale investigation of intestinal helminths in Medieval Europe.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Article
- Differential Change in the Prevalence of the Ascaris, Trichuris and Clonorchis infection Among Past East Asian Populations.The Korean journal of parasitology · 2019Article
- Assessing the Parasitic Burden in a Late Antique Florentine Emergency Burial Site.The Korean journal of parasitology · 2019Article
- The Prevotella copri Complex Comprises Four Distinct Clades Underrepresented in Westernized Populations.Cell host & microbe · 2019Article
- Temporal and Spatial Distribution ofThe Korean journal of parasitology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In the field of archaeological parasitology, researchers have long documented the distribution of parasites in archaeological time and space through the analysis of coprolites and human remains. This area of research defined the origin and migration of parasites through presence/absence studies. By the end of the 20th century, the field of pathoecology had emerged as researchers developed an interest in the ancient ecology of parasite transmission. Supporting studies were conducted to establish the relationships between parasites and humans, including cultural, subsistence, and ecological reconstructions. Parasite prevalence data were collected to infer the impact of parasitism on human health. In the last few decades, a paleoepidemiological approach has emerged with a focus on applying statistical techniques for quantification. The application of egg per gram (EPG) quantification methods provide data about parasites' prevalence in ancient populations and also identify the pathological potential that parasitism presented in different time periods and geographic places. Herein, we compare the methods used in several laboratories for reporting parasite prevalence and EPG quantification. We present newer quantification methods to explore patterns of parasite overdispersion among ancient people. These new methods will be able to produce more realistic measures of parasite infections among people of the past. These measures allow researchers to compare epidemiological patterns in both ancient and modern populations.
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.