ArticleAfrican journal of infectious diseases2018
PREVALENCE OF
Article in African journal of infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating the Prevalence of Parasitic Infections in Migrant Workers in The Middle East: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Iranian journal of public health · 2025Review
- Meat-borne parasites in the Arab world: a review in a One Health perspective.Parasitology research · 2021Review
- Etiology of diarrhea by multiplex polymerase chain reaction among young children in the United Arab Emirates: a case-control study.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- A POTENTIAL ZOONOTIC PARASITE:African journal of infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidemiological data on MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred and thirty four stool samples were collected from asymptomatic individuals presenting to the Sharjah Municipality Public Health Clinic (SMPHC) for screening of intestinal parasites for work permission purposes between 2009 and 2011. Demographic information such as age, sex, and country of origin was collected. Genomic DNA extracted from the stool samples were tested for
resultsTwenty-six individuals (19.4%) were positive for
conclusionInfection by
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.