Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34038411›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Comparison of the egg recovery rates and limit of detection for soil-transmitted helminths using the Kato-Katz thick smear, faecal flotation and quantitative real-time PCR in human stool.

Patsy A Zendejas-Heredia, Vito Colella, Sze Fui Hii, Rebecca J Traub

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Spurious passage ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patsy A Zendejas-HerediaFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4072-7728
Vito ColellaFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Sze Fui HiiFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4831-9382
Rebecca J TraubFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7484-7592
The University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMonitoring the success of soil-transmitted helminth (STH) control programs relies on accurate diagnosis and quantitative assessment of infection prevalence and intensity. As preventative chemotherapeutic program coverage for STH expands, the necessity of gaining insights into the relative or comparative sensitivities, in terms of limits of detection (LOD) and egg-recovery-rates (ERR) for microscopy and quantitative polymerase chain reaction qPCR-based diagnostic techniques becomes imperative to inform suitability for their intended use for large scale STH monitoring and treatment efficacy studies. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThe diagnostic performance in terms of ERR and LOD of the Kato-Katz (KK) thick smear technique, sodium nitrate (NaNO3) faecal floatation (FF) and qPCR for the accurate detection and enumeration of STH eggs were calculated and expressed in eggs per gram (EPG), by experimentally seeding parasite-free human faeces with Ascaris spp., Trichuris spp. and Necator americanus eggs representing low, medium and high intensity infections. The efficiency of NaNO3 flotation was also calculated over a range of specific gravities (SpGr) for the optimum recovery of STH eggs. FF of SpGr 1.30 recovered 62.7%, 11% and 8.7% more Trichuris spp., Necator americanus and Ascaris spp. eggs respectively, than the recommended SpGr of 1.20. All diagnostic methods demonstrated strong direct correlation to the intensity of seeded EPG. KK and FF (SpGr 1.30) resulted in significant lower ERRs compared to qPCR (p <0.05). qPCR demonstrated significantly (p <0.05) greater sensitivity with an ability to detect as little as 5 EPG for all three STH, compared to 50 EPG by KK and FF (SpGr 1.30). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This study compares the diagnostic parameters in terms of LOD and ERRs of STHs for the KK, FF and qPCR. These results indicate that the diagnostic performance of qPCR assays should be considered by control programs in the phase that aims to seek confirmation of transmission break and cessation of preventive chemotherapy in low-transmission settings, in line with the control targets of the WHO neglected tropical diseases 2030 Roadmap.

Indexed as

AnimalsAscarisFecesHelminthiasisHumansLimit of DetectionMicroscopyNecator americanusNitratesParasite Egg CountPrevalenceReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTrichurisNitratessodium nitrate

Identifiers

PMID34038411
PMCPMC8153506
OpenAlexW3163969822

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.