ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2022
A simple new screening tool for diagnosing imported schistosomiasis.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Male genitourinary schistosomiasis-related symptoms among long-term Western African migrants in Spain: a prospective population-based screening study.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2024Article
- Schistosomiasis screening in non-endemic countries from a cost perspective: Knowledge gaps and research priorities. The case of African long-term residents in a Metropolitan Area, Spain.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We sought to test the sensitivity and feasibility of a Study design: Prospective cross-sectional study. Methods: We collected from Schistosoma-exposed individuals a 14-point check list of clinical and laboratory data related to Results: Two-hundred and fifty individuals were enrolled, of whom 220 (88%) were male and 30 (12%) female. The median age was 39 (range 18-78). One hundred-fifty (60%, 95% CI 54.9%-65.1%) had a check-list score ≥2. Serology test results were positive for 142 (56.8%, 95% CI 51.6%-62%). Chronic complications compatible with long-term Conclusions: A two-component process consisting of a scored patient consultation questionnaire followed by serological assay can be a suitable strategy for screening populations at high risk of schistosomiasis infection.
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.