ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Cost-effectiveness of soil-transmitted helminthiasis intervention programmes: A scoping review.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSoil-transmitted helminthiases (STH) infect over 1.5 billion people worldwide, causing serious health issues, especially among women of reproductive age and school-age children. Mass drug administration (MDA) using albendazole or mebendazole is the main method of control. However, high reinfection rates and limited integration with water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) and routine primary health care programs make the effectiveness of long-term control and elimination challenging.
methodsThis scoping review aimed to systematically map and summarize cost-effectiveness evidence for STH control and elimination efforts. Following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we identified 22 studies published from 1993 to 2025 through PubMed and Google Scholar. PRINCIPAL
findingsMost studies focused on MDA intervention with school or community-based delivery platforms. School-based delivery costs ranged from $0.03 to $0.76 per child, and community-wide delivery costs ranged from $0.27 to $1.74 per individual. Community-wide programs were estimated to have greater impact and cost-effectiveness in high-prevalence areas, costing $28 to $198 per disability-adjusted life year averted. Programs that delivered multiple disease interventions (integrated programs) showed the highest economic returns, primarily due to shared delivery platforms and reduced operational costs. The main factors influencing cost-effectiveness included treatment coverage, baseline prevalence, and delivery costs. Evidence gaps for cost-effectiveness still exist for preschool-aged children and integration with WASH.
conclusionThis scoping review showed that context affects the cost-effectiveness of STH intervention programs. Community-wide and integrated MDA strategies offered more economic value than school-based delivery in areas with high prevalence.
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.