ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
An intuitive sampling framework for setting-specific decision-making in soil-transmitted helminthiasis control programs.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe recently developed a general egg count framework to support cost-efficient survey design choices to inform soil-transmitted helminthiasis (STH) control programs. Yet, the interpretation and the application was not always intuitive for program managers.
methodsWe first adapted the existing framework to make the interpretation of risks of incorrect decision making more intuitive and to allow for prior information. Then, we assessed the impact of the allowable risk of incorrect decision-making and prior information on the required sample size. Finally, we determined the most cost-efficient survey design to inform the decisions (i) to switch to an event-based deworming program, and (ii) to declare STH eliminated as a public health problem (EPHP). PRINCIPAL
findingsThe required sample sizes increased when the allowable risk of incorrect decision reduced and when the mean prior approached the program prevalence threshold. For the decisions to switch to event-based deworming and to declare EPHP, we found that duplicate Kato-Katz thick smears on a single stool sample was the most cost-efficient survey design, particularly when accounting for the added benefits of the free internal quality control. The required sample size for these survey designs varied between program targets and STH species. When aiming to have one sample size that fits all STHs, we recommend sampling 6 schools and 56 children per school for decisions on switching to event-based control programs and 11 schools (74 children per school) for the decision to declare EPHP. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We developed an intuitive sampling framework for setting-specific decision-making in STH control programs. We identified the most cost-efficient survey designs for critical program decisions, but these are based on subjective but reasonable choices regarding the risk of incorrect decision making. Reaching consensus within the STH community on acceptable levels of risk is crucial to further support evidence-based decision-making.
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.