ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2019
The long run impact of early childhood deworming on numeracy and literacy: Evidence from Uganda.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis and public policy: Reconciling the evidence on deworming.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Pooled it
- Public health deworming programmes for soil-transmitted helminths in children living in endemic areas.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Deworming drugs for soil-transmitted intestinal worms in children: effects on nutritional indicators, haemoglobin, and school performance.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Early-life infectious disease exposure, the "hygiene hypothesis," and lifespan: Evidence from hookworm disease.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Decreased Weight-for-Age Associated with Mass Deworming among Young Ethiopian Schoolchildren in Jimma Town, Southwest Ethiopia: A School-Based Cross-Sectional Study.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Article
- A positive consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic: how the counterfactual experience of school closures is accelerating a multisectoral response to the treatment of neglected tropical diseases.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Depriving Out-of-School Children of Deworming Tablets for Soil-Transmitted Helminth Infection in Bangladesh: The Irony of a School-Based Deworming Programme.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Persistence and Fade-Out of Educational-Intervention Effects: Mechanisms and Potential Solutions.Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society · 2020Review
- The long run impact of early childhood deworming on numeracy and literacy: Evidence from Uganda.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2019Article
- Should the WHO withdraw support for mass deworming?PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUp to 1.45 billion people currently suffer from soil transmitted helminth infection, with the largest burden occurring in Africa and Asia. Safe and cost effective deworming treatment exists, but there is a debate about mass distribution of this treatment in high prevalence settings. While the World Health Organization recommends mass administration of anthelmintic drugs for preschool and school-aged children in high (>20%) prevalence settings, and several long run follow up studies of an influential trial have suggested large benefits that persist over time, recent systematic reviews have called this recommendation into question. METHODS AND
findingsThis paper analyzes the long-term impact of a cluster-randomized trial in eastern Uganda that provided mass deworming treatment to preschool aged children from 2000 to 2003 on the numeracy and literacy skills of children and young adults living in those villages in 2010-2015. This study uses numeracy and literacy data collected seven to twelve years after the end of the deworming trial in a randomly selected subset of communities from the original trial, by an education-focused survey that had no relationship to the deworming study. Building on an earlier working paper which used data from 2010 and 2011 survey rounds, this paper uses an additional four years of numeracy and literacy data (2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015). Aggregating data from all survey rounds, the difference between numeracy scores in treatment versus control communities is 0.07 standard deviations (SD) (95% CI -0.10, 0.24, p = 0.40), the difference in literacy scores is 0.05 SD (95% CI -0.16, 0.27, p = 0.62), and the difference in total scores is 0.07 SD (95% CI -0.11, 0.25, p = 0.44). There are significant differences in program impact by gender, with numeracy and literacy differentially positively affected for girls, and by age, with treatment effects larger for the primary school aged subsample. There are also significant treatment interactions for those living in households with more treatment-eligible children. There is no evidence of differential treatment effects on age at program eligibility or number of years of program eligibility.
conclusionsMass deworming of preschool aged children in high prevalence communities in Uganda resulted in no statistically significant gains in numeracy or literacy 7-12 years after program completion. Point estimates were positive but imprecise; the study lacked sufficient power to rule out substantial positive effects or more modest negative effects. However, there is suggestive evidence that deworming was relatively more beneficial for girls, primary school aged children, and children living in households with other treated children. RESEARCH APPROVAL: As this analysis was conducted on secondary data which is publicly available, no research approval was sought or received. All individual records were anonymized by the data provider prior to public release.
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.