ArticleParasitology2025
Scoping a social science agenda for male genital schistosomiasis in sub-Saharan Africa: posing key questions to frame appropriate research themes.
Article in Parasitology, 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.
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prevalence of female genital schistosomiasis (FGS) and male genital schistosomiasis (MGS) remains high in many low-to-medium-income countries, and each has sex-specific disease sequelae with wider detrimental gender and health impacts. Social science research studies on the former outnumber those on the latter. Indeed, in many countries across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), MGS (as with male reproductive and sexual health issues in general) is overlooked, underappreciated, and broadly orphaned within urogenital and intestinal schistosomiasis research and control. Similarly, in those countries where MGS has been reported formally, its psychosocial dimensions and effects remain poorly understood, especially in terms of context-specific cultural and societal factors. In this scoping review, we attempt to better contextualize MGS within men's sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and general wellbeing, as it often draws parallels with social science research in FGS. We discuss common psychosocial determinants, highlighting why current surveillance of MGS is particularly poor and the primary health care response to mitigate it is bottlenecked and largely stalled within the wider health system, from both top-down and bottom-up perspectives. Our specific approach remains cognisant of the context of infected households where all members could be suffering from urogenital and/or intestinal schistosomiasis. Looking ahead, we develop and frame a pragmatic social science research agenda to encourage and better explore and assess the detrimental impact of MGS on infected men and boys, considering appropriate ameliorations more holistically within primary care.
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.