BackgroundThe Kato-Katz thick smear (Kato-Katz) is the diagnostic method recommended for monitoring large-scale treatment programs implemented for the control of soil-transmitted helminths (STH) in public health, yet it is difficult to standardize. A promising alternative is the McMaster egg counting method (McMaster), commonly used in veterinary parasitology, but rarely so for the detection of STH in human stool.Methodology/Principal FindingsThe Kato-Katz and McMaster methods were compared for the detection of STH in 1,543 subjects resident in five countries across Africa, Asia and South America. The consistency of the performance of both methods in different trials, the validity of the fixed multiplication factor employed in the Kato-Katz method and the accuracy of these methods for estimating ‘true’ drug efficacies were assessed. The Kato-Katz method detected significantly more Ascaris lumbricoides infections (88.1% vs. 75.6%, p<0.001), whereas the difference in sensitivity between the two methods was non-significant for hookworm (78.3% vs. 72.4%) and Trichuris trichiura (82.6% vs. 80.3%). The sensitivity of the methods varied significantly across trials and magnitude of fecal egg counts (FEC). Quantitative comparison revealed a significant correlation (Rs >0.32) in FEC between both methods, and indicated no significant difference in FEC, except for A. lumbricoides, where the Kato-Katz resulted in significantly higher FEC (14,197 eggs per gram of stool (EPG) vs. 5,982 EPG). For the Kato-Katz, the fixed multiplication factor resulted in significantly higher FEC than the multiplication factor adjusted for mass of feces examined for A. lumbricoides (16,538 EPG vs. 15,396 EPG) and T. trichiura (1,490 EPG vs. 1,363 EPG), but not for hookworm. The McMaster provided more accurate efficacy results (absolute difference to ‘true’ drug efficacy: 1.7% vs. 4.5%).Conclusions/SignificanceThe McMaster is an alternative method for monitoring large-scale treatment programs. It is a robust (accurate multiplication factor) and accurate (reliable efficacy results) method, which can be easily standardized.

No abstract

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of solar irradiation in the prevention of diarrhoeal morbidity in children under 5 years of age, in an urban slum in Vellore, Tamil Nadu. Methods: A total of 100 children were assigned to receive drinking water that had been subjected to solar disinfection in polyethylene terephthalate bottles. One hundred age and sex matched controls were also selected. Both groups were followed by weekly home visits for a period of six months for any diarrhoeal morbidity. At the end of the follow up period, the acceptability of the intervention was assessed by interviews, questionnaires, and focus group discussions. Results: There was significant reduction in the incidence, duration, and severity of diarrhoea in children receiving solar disinfected water, despite 86% of the children drinking water other than that treated by the intervention. The incidence of diarrhoea in the intervention group was 1.7 per child-year, and among controls 2.7 per child-year, with an incidence rate ratio of 0.64 (95% CI 20.48 to 0.86). The risk of diarrhoea was reduced by 40% by using solar disinfection. In qualitative evaluation of acceptability, most women felt that solar disinfection was a feasible and sustainable method of disinfecting water. Conclusions: Solar disinfection of water is an inexpensive, effective, and acceptable method of increasing water safety in a resource limited environment, and can significantly decrease diarrhoeal morbidity in children.

In many conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes worldwideincluding Brazil's Bolsa Família-cash transfers are preferentially made to women. This feature was motivated by earlier research showing that greater control over resources among women is linked to an increase in their decision-making power and improved outcomes among children (e.g. Quisumbing, 2003). However, there is little quantitative evidence demonstrating that CCT programmes with female beneficiaries trigger increases in women's decision-making power.Previous research does not find consensus on the issue, and, further, it is largely drawn from CCTs in rural Mexico, giving little insight into how impacts might differ in different contexts. It is also important to note that transferring cash to women does not guarantee that women's control over resources will increase. For example, women's spouses or other household members could take control over the cash once it is transferred. Therefore, empirical evidence is required to assess whether CCTs can be effective in increasing women's decision-making power, and under what circumstances. Given the growing popularity of CCTs and widespread interest in increasing women's empowerment worldwide, the question has become increasingly compelling.Brazil is a particularly interesting place to study the potential impacts of a CCT on women's decision-making power. Brazil has prioritised women's empowerment in its national policy. And Bolsa Família has more beneficiaries than any other CCT in the world, so any impacts found would suggest empowerment among a large population of women. Thus Bolsa Família provides a unique opportunity to assess the impacts of CCTs on women's decisionmaking in a large, diverse setting covering both rural and urban areas and where women's empowerment is a key goal.In a recent paper (de Brauw et al., 2012), we estimate the impacts of transfers associated with Bolsa Família on several measures of women's decision-making power. To do so, we use a rich longitudinal dataset of Bolsa Família beneficiary and non-beneficiary households collected in 2005 and 2009. Outcomes are measured using a series of questions asked of the main female respondent regarding who in the household generally made decisions about a range of issues.We estimate impacts of Bolsa Família on these outcomes solely among households headed by a male and female partnership. Since benefits from Bolsa Família were not randomly assigned, we use propensity score weighting (Hirano, Imbens and Ridder, 2003) to construct a statistically balanced comparison group of non-beneficiaries. Propensity scores are constructed using extensive information on socio-economic characteristics collected at baseline, combined with municipal characteristics measured around the time of baseline.We find that Bolsa Família increases women's decision-making power along several dimensions, but with heterogeneity in impacts. A key finding is that participation in Bolsa Família significantly increases the share of women who report exclusive control over co...

No abstract