Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33315876›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020

Effect of repeated epilation for minor trachomatous trichiasis on lash burden, phenotype and surgical management willingness: A cohort study.

Esmael Habtamu, Tariku Wondie, Wubshet Gobezie, Zerihun Tadesse, Bizuayehu Gashaw, Abebaw Gebeyehu, Chrissy H Roberts, E Kelly Callahan, David Macleod, Matthew J Burton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trachoma.Lancet (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Trachoma.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Esmael HabtamuClinical Research Department, International Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6161-8427
Tariku WondieThe Carter Center, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Wubshet GobezieThe Carter Center, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zerihun TadesseThe Carter Center, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Bizuayehu GashawAmhara Regional Health Bureau, Bahirdar, Ethiopia.
Abebaw GebeyehuAmhara Regional Health Bureau, Bahirdar, Ethiopia.
Chrissy H RobertsClinical Research Department, International Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
E Kelly CallahanThe Carter Center, Georgia, Atlanta, United States of America.
David MacleodDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2371-5709
Matthew J BurtonClinical Research Department, International Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWHO endorsed the use of epilation as an alternative treatment to surgery for the management of both minor unoperated TT (UTT) and postoperative TT (PTT). However, some trachoma control programmes hesitated to implement epilation citing concerns that it would hamper TT surgical acceptance and result in larger numbers of and stiffer trichiatic eyelashes than the original TT lashes. We investigated the burden and phenotypes of post-epilation trichiatic eyelashes, and willingness to accept surgical management separately in unoperated and postoperative TT cases. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe recruited cases with minor (≤5 eyelashes from the upper eyelid touching the eye or evidence of epilation in <1/3rd of the upper eyelid) UTT (170) and PTT (169) from community-based screenings in Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Participants eyes were examined and data on present and future willingness to accept surgical management collected at baseline and every month for 6-months. Eyelashes touching the eye were counted and their phenotypes documented. Participants were trained on how to epilate. Epilation was done by the participants at home and by the examiner during follow-ups when requested by the participant. Follow-up rates were ≥97%. There was evidence of a significant reduction in the burden of trichiatic eyelashes in unoperated (mean difference = -0.90 [-1.11- -0.69]; RR = 0.50 [95% CI, 0.40-0.62]; p<0.0001), and postoperative (mean difference = -1.16 [-1.36- -0.95]; RR = 0.38 [95% CI, 0.31-0.48]; p<0.0001) cases 6-month after frequent epilation. Post-epilation trichiatic eyelashes at 6-months had higher odds of being thin (40.2% vs 55.8%, OR = 1.88 [95% CI, 1.21-2.93]; p = 0.0048), weak (39.8% vs 70.8%, OR = 3.68 [95%CI,2.30-5.88]; p<0.0001), and half-length (30.9% vs 43.3%, OR = 1.71 [1.09-2.68]; p = 0.020) than the pre-epilation trichiatic eyelashes in unoperated cases. There was a significant increase in the proportion of weak trichiatic eyelashes (OR = 1.99 [95% CI, 1.03-3.83; p = 0.039) in postoperative cases. In all 6 follow-up time points, 120/164 (73.2%) of unoperated and 134/163 (82.2%) of postoperative cases indicated that they would accept surgery if their trichiasis progressed. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In this study setting, frequent epilation neither hampers surgical acceptance nor results in more damaging trichiatic eyelashes than the pre-epilation lashes; and can be used as an alternative to the programmatic management of minor unoperated and postoperative TT cases.

Indexed as

Hair RemovalAdultCohort StudiesCorneal OpacityEyelashesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative CareTrachomaTrichiasisVision Disorders

Identifiers

PMID33315876
PMCPMC7769600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.