ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Identifying hotspots of S. haematobium infection following praziquantel treatment during multiple annual mass drug administration campaigns in Zimbabwe.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The big picture : Parasites, People and the Path to Ending Schistosomiasis.EMBO reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urogenital schistosomiasis is contracted from the Schistosoma haematobium parasite and is treated with the drug praziquantel (PZQ). Despite MDA interventions, persistent hotspots (PHS) of S. haematobium infection have been identified in multiple schistosome endemic African countries but have yet to be characterised in Zimbabwe. This study assessed long-term infection persistence and variability in praziquantel (PZQ) efficacy among school-aged children (6-15 years) in 29 districts of Zimbabwe, using data from MDAs conducted between 2012 and 2017. Metrics included infection prevalence, mean egg count, and treatment efficacy indicators. Two hotspot definitions were applied: (i) prevalence-based persistent hotspots (PPHS), identified by limited reduction or rebound in prevalence; and (ii) efficacy-based persistent hotspots (EPHS), defined by cure rates below 70%. Statistical comparisons between hotspot and non-hotspot ("responder") districts used regression models, Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U tests. Analyses revealed four PPHS and six EPHS. PPHS districts exhibited significantly higher baseline prevalence and infection intensity compared with responders (P = 0.043), a pattern not observed for EPHS. Greater distance from freshwater sources was associated with EPHS occurrence (P = 0.016), although this appeared to be an indirect effect of initially high infection intensities. Lower treatment frequency correlated with increased hotspot occurrence, but the relationship was not statistically significant for either hotspot category. Other investigated factors including treatment coverage, timing of drug administration and ecological suitability for intermediate host snails showed no significant association with hotspot status. The elevated initial prevalence and infection intensity in PPHS suggest these indicators could be used for early hotspot identification, enabling targeted adjustments in intervention strategies. The findings underscore the limitations of relying solely on preventive chemotherapy in high-transmission settings. Integrating complementary measures such as water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions and snail control may improve outcomes, particularly in hotspot areas. In conclusion, the persistence of S. haematobium hotspots in Zimbabwe highlights the need for adaptive, integrated control approaches aligned with the WHO's 2030 roadmap. Monitoring baseline epidemiological indicators could facilitate earlier detection of persistent transmission foci, guiding more effective and sustainable schistosomiasis control.
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.