ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Impact and cost-effectiveness of water, sanitation, hygiene, and health education interventions in the control and elimination of soil-transmitted helminthiasis: 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 helminthiasis (STH) remains a major public health problem in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) despite widespread implementation of mass drug administration (MDA). Rapid reinfection after treatment highlights the limitations of MDA approaches and underscores the need for complementary interventions. Water, sanitation, hygiene, and health education (WASH) interventions are widely promoted as essential components of integrated STH control strategies. However, evidence on WASH impact and cost-effectiveness remains fragmented and is poorly synthesized. This scoping review aimed to systematically map and summarize the evidence on the impact and cost-effectiveness of WASH interventions for STH control and elimination.
methodsFollowing Arksey and O'Malley's framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature with no date restrictions. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for papers that met our inclusion criteria. Studies assessing the impact and/or cost-effectiveness of WASH interventions, alone or integrated with MDA, on STH outcomes were included. PRINCIPAL
findingsSixteen studies, predominantly from LMICs, met the inclusion criteria, with Kenya contributing the largest number. Findings showed that combining WASH interventions with MDA led to greater reductions in reinfection with Ascaris lumbricoides than MDA alone, particularly in school- and community-based programs. However, behavioural improvements alone were insufficient without supporting infrastructure, and their effects on other helminths were inconsistent. Notably, only one study conducted a formal cost-effectiveness analysis of WASH interventions, revealing a critical gap in economic evidence.
conclusionIntegrating WASH interventions with MDA can enhance STH control outcomes, particularly for A. lumbricoides, but the lack of robust economic evaluations limits informed policy and investment decisions. Future research should prioritize cost-effectiveness analyses and long-term assessments of integrated WASH strategies to support sustainable STH elimination efforts.
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.