ArticleTropical medicine and infectious disease2023
Towards Inclusive Diagnostics for Neglected Tropical Diseases: User Experience of a New Digital Diagnostic Device in Low-Income Settings.
Article in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact assessment of effective rounds of mass drug administration against schistosomiasis and soil transmitted helminthiasis among school age children in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Schistosomiasis and Soil Transmitted Helminthiasis Among School Age Children: Impact of 3-5 Annual Rounds of Mass Drug Administration in Ekiti State, Southwest Nigeria.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the AiDx Assist device for automated detection ofFrontiers in parasitology · 2025Article
- Validation of artificial intelligence-based digital microscopy for automated detection of Schistosoma haematobium eggs in urine in Gabon.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Developing inclusive digital health diagnostic for schistosomiasis: a need for guidance via target product profiles.Frontiers in parasitology · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Designing new and inclusive diagnostic tools to detect Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) to achieve rational disease control requires a co-design process where end-users' input is important. Failure to involve all potential end-users in new diagnostics for NTDs can result in low use and adoption failure, leading to persistent infection hot spots and ineffective disease control. There are different categories of potential end-users of new diagnostic tools for NTD control, and it is unclear if there are differences between the user efficiency, effectiveness, perception, and acceptability across these end-user categories. This study evaluated the usability, user perception, contextual factors affecting the user's experience, and acceptability of a new digital optical diagnostic device for NTDs across three types of potential end users. A total of 21 participants were tested. Laboratory scientists, technicians, and Community Health Extension Workers (CHEWs) in training achieved similar scores on the usability and user perception questionnaires with no statistically significant difference between end-user categories. All participants also have high scores for the user perception domains which strongly correlate with the acceptability of the AiDx NTDx Assist device. This study indicates that, by providing digital diagnostic tools in combination with minimal training and support, CHEWs undergoing training and, by extension, CHEWs post-training, can be involved in the diagnoses of NTDs, potentially enhancing a community's capabilities to diagnose, treat, and control NTDs.
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.