ArticlePloS one2026
Bridging perception and reality: Parasitic identification in delusional parasitosis.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelusional parasitosis (DP) is a psychiatric condition in which individuals hold a fixed, false belief that they are infected with parasites. These patients frequently consult parasite clinics and submit household or biological debris, often nonparasitic in origin, for parasitological examination. Although parasitologists are not directly responsible for treating this psychiatric disorder, they play a key role in identifying or excluding parasitic infections and guiding appropriate care. Misidentification of artifacts as parasites may result in unnecessary treatment, prolonged distress, and, in some cases, delayed diagnosis of DP. Thus, this study examined specimens submitted for parasitological diagnosis with the aim of assessing diagnostic accuracy and evaluating the role of laboratory confirmation in managing suspected parasitic infections.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 382 clinical specimens submitted for parasitological examination to the Department of Helminthology, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University (June 2014-June 2022). All specimens were examined macroscopically and microscopically using standard parasitological techniques.
resultsParasitic infections were present in 108 (28.3%) specimens, including nematodes, cestodes, and trematodes, such as Trichuris trichiura, Enterobius vermicularis, hookworm, and Taenia spp. The remaining 274 (71.7%) specimens included negative fecal specimens and specimens comprising various artifacts, such as food residues, plant materials, synthetic fibers, skin flakes, and other debris. This study was concurrently performed using outpatient data obtained from the Parasite Excellence Clinic, Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University. Notably, 84 patients were ultimately diagnosed with DP.
conclusionsAccurate parasite identification is crucial to ensure proper treatment in true parasitic infections and prevent DP misdiagnosis. This study highlights the importance of an integrated parasitology-psychiatry approach, particularly when patients present with persistent symptoms despite negative laboratory test results. These findings support the establishment of diagnostic protocols and improved interdisciplinary communication to enhance care for patients with suspected parasitic infections.
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.