2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2014.05.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity of diagnostic tests for human soil-transmitted helminth infections: a meta-analysis in the absence of a true gold standard

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

12
241
1
3

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 229 publications
(257 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
(71 reference statements)
12
241
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…25,38,39 A limitation of the Kato Katz technique for diagnosis of STH is that light infections may remain undiagnosed, especially for hookworm. 40 Thus, the light intensity of Trichuris and hookworm infections in this population may have led to an underestimation of prevalence of these species. The use of single stool samples further reduces the sensitivity of STH diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…25,38,39 A limitation of the Kato Katz technique for diagnosis of STH is that light infections may remain undiagnosed, especially for hookworm. 40 Thus, the light intensity of Trichuris and hookworm infections in this population may have led to an underestimation of prevalence of these species. The use of single stool samples further reduces the sensitivity of STH diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The use of a single faecal sample will underestimate the prevalence of STH. 36 The lack of funds and time and difficulties for village residents to provide samples when using open forest or coastal areas for defaecation limited the survey to a single sample per participant. The modified Kato-Katz technique may have also underestimated the prevalence and intensity since clearing of the faecal matter does not occur.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to some authors [40,41], if there is an absence of a true gold standard, meta-analysis can be applied, based on the comparison of the sensitivity and the quantitative performances of several methods. In their study, Nikolay et al (2014) [41] mentioned the following methods: Kato-Katz, direct microscopy, McMaster, FLOTAC and Mini-FLOTAC. The researchers concluded that the highest sensitivity was for the FLOTAC method and the lowest for the direct microscopy method.…”
Section: Correction Coefficients Of Counting Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%