ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2022
Reconstructing the history of helminth prevalence in the UK.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Restoring balance in atopic disorders: insights into type 2 immunity and chronic inflammation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Cichlid fishes are promising underutilized models to investigate helminth-host-microbiome interactions.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Historic and Prehistoric Epidemics: An Overview of Sources Available for the Study of Ancient Pathogens.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Intestinal helminth parasites (worms) have afflicted humans throughout history and their eggs are readily detected in archaeological deposits including at locations where intestinal parasites are no longer considered endemic (e.g. the UK). Parasites provide valuable archaeological insights into historical health, sanitation, hygiene, dietary and culinary practices, as well as other factors. Differences in the prevalence of helminths over time may help us understand factors that affected the rate of infection of these parasites in past populations. While communal deposits often contain relatively high numbers of parasite eggs, these cannot be used to calculate prevalence rates, which are a key epidemiological measure of infection. The prevalence of intestinal helminths was investigated through time in England, based on analysis of 464 human burials from 17 sites, dating from the Prehistoric to Industrial periods. Eggs from two faecal-oral transmitted nematodes (Ascaris sp. and Trichuris sp.) and the food-derived cestodes (Taenia spp. and Diphyllobothrium latum syn Dibothriocephalus latus) were identified, although only Ascaris was detected at a high frequency. The changing prevalence of nematode infections can be attributed to changes in effective sanitation or other factors that affect these faecal-oral transmitted parasites and the presence of cestode infections reflect dietary and culinary preferences. These results indicate that the impact of helminth infections on past populations varied over time, and that some locations witnessed a dramatic reduction in parasite prevalence during the industrial era (18th-19th century), whereas other locations continued to experience high prevalence levels. The factors underlying these reductions and the variation in prevalence provide a key historical context for modern anthelmintic programs.
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.