ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2024
Training of Field-Workers for Rapid Assessment of Scabies Prevalence: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study in Mozambique.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scabies is endemic in many resource-poor tropical areas, causing significant morbidity. However, our understanding of the true burden of scabies in Africa is limited, partly owing to limited capacity and challenges accessing the currently recommended diagnostic tools. The primary objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of scabies assessments made by minimally trained field-workers. We trained field-workers with a minimum of secondary school education in the diagnosis of scabies. After the training, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of assessments made by nine field-workers compared with the reference standard. In all, 193 individuals were assessed for scabies. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated, as well as agreement (κ coefficients) between medical doctors and between field-workers. Of the 193 participants, 26% had scabies according to the reference standard. The sensitivity of field-worker diagnosis compared with the reference standard was 94% (95% CI: 90-99%), and the specificity was 96% (95% CI: 90-97%). The determination of severity by field-workers was less accurate; the sensitivity for severe scabies was 61% (95% CI: 48-74%), and the mean specificity was 97% (95% CI: 93-100%). This study demonstrated that field-workers without medical qualifications were capable of diagnosing scabies to a similar level of accuracy as experienced medical doctors after a short period of focal training. This may facilitate rapid assessments of scabies prevalence for public health purposes and decisions about mass drug administration implementation in similar settings.
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.