ArticleBMC global and public health2025
Incidence of Rodentolepis nana infection within people seeking asylum and refugees attending health screening at an integrated refugee health service.
Article in BMC global and public health, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRodentolepis (Hymenolepis) nana (R. nana) is the most common cestode to infect humans, and whilst most infections are asymptomatic, those with a high burden of infection can present with abdominal pain, diarrhoea, or growth stunting. The Respond service, London, offers screening and treatment for common infections to people seeking asylum and refugees (PSAR), including testing for gastrointestinal parasites such as R. nana.
methodsWe present a retrospective observational analysis of all positive R. nana results in patients screened by the Respond service between April 2016 and July 2023. A positive result was defined by the presence of R. nana ova on stool microscopy for ova, cysts and parasites (OCP) or R. nana DNA detection using the Novodiag® Stool Parasite assay (NSP), a cartridge based multiplex molecular assay. We explore incidence of R. nana infection and efficacy of treatment in PSAR presenting to an integrated refugee health service.
resultsR. nana was identified in 54/1797 (3%) of patients who had a stool sample collected in the Respond service. Median age of patients was 15 years (interquartile range [IQR] 9-17), and 38/54 (70%) were male, reflecting the sex demographic of the cohort. Coinfection with other parasites occurred in 28/54 (52%) of the cohort. Of the 27 patients who tested positive for R. nana where their family members were also tested, 11 patients (41%) had family members who were also infected with R. nana. Treatment failure (defined as failure to clear R. nana detected by OCP/NSP after treatment with praziquantel) occurred in 43% of the patients for whom a clearance sample was returned.
conclusionsWe show a significant prevalence of R. nana in people seeking asylum screened within the Respond cohort. We show significant clustering within family units and a relatively high treatment failure rate. We propose prompt treatment of positive cases to prevent transmission within families, and consideration of treatment of family units simultaneously to prevent re-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.