Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2023 Dec 15;17(12):e0011846. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011846

High prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia

Dawit Getachew 1,*, Fekede Woldekidan 2, Gizachew Ayele 3, Yordanos Bekele 1, Samrawit Sleshi 1, Eyob Tekalgn 3, Teshale Worku 3, Mengistu Ayenew 1, Biruk Bogale 1, Abyot Asres 1
Editor: Joseph M Vinetz4
PMCID: PMC10756553  PMID: 38100523

Abstract

Background

Active trachoma is a highly contagious ongoing stage of trachoma that predominantly occurs during childhood in an endemic area. This study assessed the prevalence and factors associated with active trachoma among school-aged children.

Methodology/Principal findings

A community-based analytical cross-sectional study was done from March 1st to June 30th, 2021, in Southwest Ethiopia’s people’s regional state. A total of 1292 school-aged children were surveyed. The quantitative data were collected using a pre-tested, structured interview-based questionnaire and observation check list. The World health organization (WHO) simplified trachoma grading system was used to assess stages of trachoma. In this study, the prevalence of active trachoma was 570(44.1%), 95% CI (41.4, 46.9). Also, age group 6–10; being female; flies at household (HH), flies on child’s face, improved water source, improved sanitation, presence of ocular discharge, presence of nasal discharge, and unclean faces of the child were significantly associated with active trachoma.

Conclusions/Significance

The very high prevalence of active trachoma in the study area is significantly associated with; age group 6–10, female gender, presence of flies in household and on child’s face, presence of ocular and nasal discharge, unclean faces, improved water source, improved sanitation in the household. Thus, environmental sanitation and facial cleans trachoma elimination strategy should be intensified in the study area.

Author summary

Trachoma is the leading cause of preventable blindness, due to repeated bacterial infection of the eye. The early and contagious stage of the disease, known as active trachoma, predominantly affects children. The impact of the disease includes permanent visual impairment, dependency and stigma.

The WHO targeted to eliminate trachoma by 2030 as a public health concern in each endemic country. Through the implementation of the SAFE strategy (surgery to treat the blinding stage; antibiotics to clear infection; environmental improvement; improving access to water and sanitation).

In Ethiopia majority of the districts are still trachoma endemic. Thus, this study assessed the prevalence and factors associated with active trachoma among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopian Peoples Regional State. The region is highly endemic for several neglected tropical diseases including trachoma.

In this study 44.1% of the participant had active trachoma. Also, age groups 6–10, being female, improved water sources, and sanitation, presence of flies in the house and on the child’s face, ocular and nasal discharge, unclean faces were factors associated with the occurrence of active trachoma.

Intensive scaling up of the facial cleanness and environmental improvement components of the SAFE strategy helps reduce the high prevalence of active trachoma.

Introduction

Trachoma is a neglected tropical disease caused by the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis [1]. The disease is transmitted by direct personal contact and by flies that have come into contact with discharge from an infected person’s eyes or nose [2]. Trachoma limits the education and economic empowerment of infected individuals, which results in dependency and stigma [3]. Communities who lack access to water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) were primarily affected by trachoma [4,5].

Trachoma has five clinical stages: trachoma follicular, trachoma intense, trachoma scarring, trachomatous trichiasis, and corneal opacity [1,6]. Active trachoma, an early stage of trachoma, is conjunctival inflammation, which can lead to, scarring, and blindness if untreated [3,610]. Globally, from 166.6 million people lived in trachoma-endemic areas in 2019, 87% were from African and 46% from Ethiopia [1115].

A multitude of factors were associated with active trachoma, including age of the child and the number of children [1618]; as access WASH at HH [2,12,1719]; presence of ocular and nasal discharge, habit of face washing, not using soap while washing the face, and sharing towels [12,16,18].

The SAFE strategy is being implemented in endemic countries eliminate trachoma as a public health importance [2023]. But, in Ethiopia 80% of districts were endemic and majority of HH lack access to improved WASH [13,2426]. However, no research has assessed the prevalence of active trachoma in the study area. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia Peoples Regional State (SWEPRS).

Methods

Ethics statement

The Ethics and Research Committee of Mizan-Tepi University approved and issued the ethical clearance. Also, permission was obtained from the zonal health department. Informed written consent was sought from parents and assent from children aged 7–16 years. All participants were informed the aims, purpose, risks, and benefits of the study. Throughout the study, confidentiality, anonymity, and the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time were respected. The data was kept safe under strict supervision by the principal investigator. Children who have active trachoma were treated by tetracycline eye ointment, and referral linkage was made with a health facility.

Study design and settings

A Community based Analytical cross- sectional study was done in SWEPRS from the 1st of March to the 30th of June, 2021, as part of a broader research theme ‘prevalence of selected neglected tropical diseases among school-aged children in SWEPRS.’ The region is divided into six zones: Kaffa, Bench-Sheko, Sheka, West-omo, Dawro, and Konta Zones. In these zones, there are 57 districts (41 rural districts and 16 city administrations). There are also kebeles in the region (kebele is the lowest legal administrative division in Ethiopia). The total population of the region is 3,368,385 [27]. In the region, there are one teaching university hospital, two general hospitals, 10 primary hospitals, 134 health centers, and 836 health posts.

Study population and eligibility criteria

All school-aged children whose age was found in the range of 6–16 year in SWEPRS were the source population. All school-aged children whose age was found in the range of 6–16 year and lived in selected HH during the data collection were the study population. All school-aged children, irrespective of their school enrollment status, paired with HH heads who lived in the selected kebele for at least 6 months were included in the study. Children who were severely ill and unable to respond or participate were excluded from the study.

Sample size determination and sampling technique

The sample size was calculated using Epi info software, For the first objective, with the assumptions: prevalence of active trachoma 17.5% [13], margin of error 5%, Z/2 95% CL = 1.96, and design effect 2. The calculated sample was 444. For the second objective; considering the assumption: Z/2 95% CL = 1.96, the open defecation-free status variable with OR 2.52, percent of outcome in exposed 85.5% [13], the calculated sample size was 1200 and adding 10% for non-response rate makes the final sample size 1320.

A multi-stage sampling technique was used. First, three zones: Bench-Sheko, Kaffa, and West-Omo were selected randomly. The selected zones were stratified in to rural districts and city administrations to select 12 rural districts and 4 city administrations. At least 30% kebeles in each selected strata were selected by using the lottery method. The sample was proportionally allocated to each selected kebele based on their contribution. Finally, a sampling frame was prepared by listing HH that have eligible individual, and participants were selected using a simple random sampling technique. If more than one school-aged child lived in the same HH, one child was selected by lottery method.

Variables of the study

Dependent variable

Presence or absence of active trachoma.

Independent variable

Socio-demographic characteristics include: the sex of the HH head, education status of the HH head, occupation of HH the head, family size and number children aged 1 to 9 years in the HH. Behavioral factors include: frequency of face washing, using soap, discharge from the eye and nose, presence of flies on child face.

Environmental and WASH related factors includes: Prescence of feces around the HH, waste disposal, source of water, distance to water source and availability of latrine.

Operational definitions

Active trachoma: the presence of five or more follicles greater than 0.5 mm in diameter in the central part of upper tarsal conjunctiva or inflammatory thickening of the tarsal conjunctiva that obscures more than half of the normal deep tarsal vessels in either of the child’s eyes [9,28].

Improved water sources: adequately protected from outside contamination, in particular from fecal matter HH connections, public standpipes, boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs and rainwater collection [29,30].

Improved sanitation; is flush or pour-flush to piped sewer system, septic tank pit latrines, ventilated-improved pit latrines, or pit latrines with slab or composting toilets [29,30].

Unclean face: Any dust and food on the face during clinical examination [16].

Data collection methods and materials

The data were collected using a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire, and observational checklist prepared and adopted after reviewing relevant literature [16,18], and a simplified WHO trachoma grading system [9,28]. The interview questionnaire measures sociodemographic characteristics, and behavioral factors. The interview was conducted by four trained public health professionals in the participants compound where they are comfortable. The observation check list was used to measure the HH and surrounding for WASH status. The observation was done by four trained environmental health professionals immediately after the interview was completed. The clinical trachoma grading was done by four trained BSc nurses to clinically diagnose each eye of the child.

Data quality control

The questionnaire was prepared in English, then translated into Amharic and retranslated back to English to keep consistency. Also, the interview questionnaire was pretested on 5% of the sample in area where the study was not done. In addition, the data collectors and supervisors were trained on the purpose of the study, data collection technique for two days. Supervisors and investigators checked the collected data for completeness, accuracy.

Data processing and analysis

The data were coded, cleaned, and entered into Epi Data Version 4.02, then exported to SPSS version 23 for further analysis. In bivariable logistic regression analysis variables with p-value less than 0.2 were entered in to multiple logistic regression. In multiple logistic regression variables with p-value less than 0.05 were considered as significantly associated with active trachoma. The model fitness was assessed using Hosmer -Lemeshow and Omnibus test. Finally, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) reported with 95% CI.

Result

Socio-demographic characteristics of the study participants

In this study 1292 school-aged children participated; the response rate was 97.87%. Nearly half of the study participants were female (55%) and in the age group 6–10 (53%). The majority of study participants (86%) were rural. Moreover, 46% and 12% of the study participants were from 1st cycle and 2nd cycle primary schools, respectively. Also, 42% of the participants did not enroll in school (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of study participant (n = 1292).

Variables Category Frequency(n) Percent (%)
Place of residence Urban 155 14
Rural 1087 86
Number children aged 1–9 One 653 51
Two or more 639 49
Family size 1–2 438 34
3–5 439 34
Above 5 415 32
Wealth index Poor 609 47
Medium 420 33
Rich 263 20
Sex of the child Male 582 45
Female 710 55
Age of the child 6–10 680 53
11–16 612 47
Child enrolment status Enrolled 747 58
Not enrolled 545 42
Child educational level Not enrolled 545 42
First cycle 594 46
Second cycle 153 12

HH: Household

Environmental characteristics of the households and surrounding

In this study, (55%) and (56%) of the HH have improved water sources and sanitation. Only 17% of the HH get water within premises. The latrine coverage was 572(44%), but 729(56%) of the child defecate in the field. In 819(63%) and 468 (36%) of the compound of the HH and around the HH human feces and animal feces were observed respectively. In 503(39%) of the HH domestic animal were present. In 956(74%) of the HH the waste disposal system was improper, and in 567 (44%) of the HH flies were observed (Table 2).

Table 2. Environmental characteristics of the households and surrounding.

Variables Category Frequency(n) Percent (%)
Source water for HH Unimproved 575 45
Improved 717 55
Time to fetch water 1–30 minute 214 17
30–60 min 740 57
Above 60 min 338 26
Availability of latrine facilities at HH Yes 568 44
No 724 56
Latrine type Improved 572 44
Not improved 720 56
Utilization of toilet by the child Latrine 563 44
Open field 729 56
Feces near the HH Yes 819 63
No 473 37
Domestic animal in the HH Yes 503 39
No 789 61
Fece of animal around HH Yes 468 36
No 824 64
Is there a flies seen at HH Yes 567 44
No 725 56
Waste disposal system Proper 336 26
Improper 956 74

HH: Household

Behavioral characteristics of the school aged children

In this study only 374(29%) of school aged children wash their hands and face daily. But only 6% of them uses soap to wash their hands and face. Also, nasal and ocular discharge were observed in 203 (16%) and 220 (17%) of school aged children respectively. Half 646 (50%) of school aged children participated in the study lack facial cleans (Table 3).

Table 3. Behavioural characteristics of school-aged child, Southwest Ethiopia, 2021.

Variable’s Category Frequency(n) Percent (%)
Face washing habit Yes 374 29
No 918 71
Frequency face washing daily Do not wash 918 71
Once a day 170 13
Two or more 204 16
Using soap to wash hands and face Water only 297 23
Soap with water 76 6
Do not wash 919 71
Clean nail Yes 241 19
No 1051 81
Nasal discharge Yes 203 16
No 1089 84
Ocular discharge Yes 220 17
No 1072 83
Flies y on the child face Yes 203 16
No 1089 84
child’s face Clean 646 50
Unclean 646 50

Prevalence of active trachoma

In this study, the overall prevalence of active trachoma among school aged children in was 44.12 with 95% CI (41.4, 46.9) (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Prevalence of trachoma among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia Peoples Regional States, 2021.

Fig 1

Factor associated with active trachoma

In bivariable logistic regression age group, gender, number of children aged 1–9 years, water source, face washing, availability of latrine, sanitation, human and animal feces at HH, flies in the HH, ocular and nasal discharge, flies on the child’s face, and condition of child’s face were variables showed association at p value less than 0.2. In the multiple logistic regression, age group, gender, water source, sanitation status, flies at HH, ocular discharge, nasal discharge, flies on the child’s face, and condition of child’s face were the variables significantly associated with active trachoma at P value less than 0.05.

Accordingly, the odds of active trachoma were 2.15 times higher among study participants in the age group 6–10 years than those in the age group 11–16 year [adjusted OR = 2.15 (95% CI: 1.51–3.06)]. Similarly, the odds of active trachoma were 15.36 times higher among female children than males [adjusted OR = 15.36 (95% CI: 10.79, 21.86)]. Also, the odds of active trachoma were decreased by 53% and 31% among study participants who have access to improved water source and improved sanitation at their HH [adjusted OR = .47 (95% CI: (.33,.67)]and [adjusted OR = .31 (95% CI: (.22,.59)] respectively.

In addition, the odds of trachoma were 16.26 and 7.19 times higher among study participant in whom HH flies were observed at their HH and on their face [adjusted OR = 16.26 (95% CI: (9.93,26.64)] and [adjusted OR = 7.19 (95% CI: (3.87,13.34)] respectively. On top of this, the odds of active trachoma were 10.18 and 1.61 times higher among study participants who have ocular discharge and nasal discharge [adjusted OR = 10.18 (95% CI: (5.84,17.76)] and [adjusted OR = 1.61 (95% CI: (1.06, 2.46)] respectively.

Moreover, the odds of active trachoma were 2.29 times higher among study participants whose faces were unclean [adjusted OR = 2.29 (95% CI: 1.57, 3.34)] (Table 4).

Table 4. Bivariable and Multiple variable analysis of factors associated with trachoma among School aged children in Southwest Ethiopia, 2021.

Trachoma COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI)
Yes No
Age of the child 6–10 253 427 1.81(1.45,2.27) * 2.15(1.51,3.06) **
11–16 317 295 1 1
Sex of the child Male 435 147 1 1
Female 135 575 12.60(9.67,16.4) * 15.36(10.79,21.86) **
Number of Children in HH One 307 346 1 1
Two or more 263 376 1.27(1.01,1.58) * 1.10(.79,1.53)
Water source Unimproved 293 424 1 1
Improved 277 298 .71 (.59, .92) * .47(.33,.67) **
Face washing Yes 87 287 3.66(2.79, 4.81) * 6.56(4.24,10.16)
No 483 435 1 1
Availability of latrine Yes 305 263 1 1
No 265 459 2.01(1.60,2.51) * 2.12(.13,34.09)
Sanitation status Improved 308 264 .49(.39, .61) * .31(.02, 4.59) **
unimproved 262 458 1 1
Feces near the HH Yes 321 498 1.3(1.37, 2.17) * 2.42(.97,6.06)
No 249 224 1 1
Fece of animal around HH Yes 195 273 1.17(.93,1.47) * .75(.48,1.18)
No 375 449 1 1
Flies seen at HH Yes 298 269 1.85(1.47,2.30) * 16.26(9.93,26.64) **
No 272 453 1 1
Nasal discharge Yes 114 89 1.77(1.31, 2.40) * 1.61(1.06, 2.46) **
No 456 633 1 1
Ocular discharge Yes 36 184 5.07(3.48, 7.39) * 10.18(5.84,17.76) **
No 534 538 1 1
Flies on child face Yes 54 149 2.49(1.78, 3.46) * 7.19(3.87,13.34) **
No 516 573 1 1
Child’s face Clean 312 334 1 1
Unclean 258 388 1.41(1.13, 1.75) * 2.29(1.57,3.34) **

* p value < 0.2,

** p value < 0.05

Discussion

In this study the prevalence of active trachoma among school-aged children was very high 44.1%. This result is in line with findings from adjacent regions and national report [12,31,32]. However, the finding is very high when compared with similar studies in Ethiopia and abroad [13,16,17,19,3337]. The geography, environment, and population variation can be the reason the result difference. The current study assessed children age ranges 6–16 year; while the earlier research assessed pre-school-aged children [19,33], children aged 1–8 year [17], children aged 1–9 year [13,16,35,36] and children aged 5–9 year [37]. Beyond this, the earlier research had been carried out prior to the COVID-19 pandemic; yet, the pandemic had impeded the progress of the 2020 trachoma elimination goal [38].

In this study, the odds of active trachoma were 2.15 times higher among children in the age group 6–10 year as compared to those in the age group 11–16 year. This result is in line with finding from similar research [37,39]. Its due to the fact that younger children do not follow hygiene practice to protect them self from trachoma [2,39,40].

Also, the odds of active trachoma were 15.36 times higher among female school-aged children than male. The finding is supported by similar research findings and other evidence [13,39,41]. The gender disparity in acquiring active trachoma among girls can be associated with the gender role that baby girls play in taking care of younger family members who are potential sources of trachoma infection. This disproportionate risk can persist even in the later age of the girl as a woman because of the raising of children, which increases the recurrent acquisition of the infection, complications, and blindness.

In addition, the odds of active trachoma decreased by 53% and 69% among school-aged children who have access to improved water sources and improved sanitation in their HH. This is in line with the study findings, because lack of access to improved WASH facilities in HH is a barrier to maintain personal and environmental hygiene [16,33,36]. Majority of HH in Ethiopia lacks access to improved WASH, children living in this HH are at increased risk of trachoma [26].

Subsequently, the odds of active trachoma were 16.26 and 7.19 times higher among participants in whom HH and face flies were observed, respectively. The finding was in line with results from similar studies because certain species of flies act as mechanical vectors for trachoma infection by transporting the bacteria from infected children to healthy children [2,16,21,37,42].

Moreover, the odds of active trachoma were 10.18, 1.61, and 2 times higher among school-aged children on whom ocular and nasal discharge were observed and whose faces conditions were unclean, respectively. The result is in line with findings from similar studies [12,13,16,19,33]. This is because an unclean face, nasal discharge, and ocular discharge attract flies, which transmit the bacteria from infected children to healthy children [2].

Strengths and limitations of the study

The limitation of this study was cross-sectional nature of the design, which is difficult to show temporal relation between variables. Social desirability bias was also potential limitation, but using observation check list had minimized it. Moreover, addressing most trachoma impacted population, with relatively large sample size and large geographical coverage is the strength of the study.

Conclusion

This study found that the prevalence of active trachoma among school-aged children was very high when compared with the WHO threshold. Also, age group 6–10, female gender, presence of ocular and nasal discharge, unclean face of the child’s, presence of flies on the child’s face, and at HH have significantly associated with increased odds of active trachoma among school-aged children, while access to improved water sources and improved sanitation lowered the odds of active trachoma among school-aged children. Thus, to reduce the high prevalence of active trachoma in the study area, intensifying and scaling up the facial cleanness and environmental and sanitation components of the SAFE strategy is needed by giving great attention to those in the age group 6–10 and female gender.

Supporting information

S1 File. Questionnaire.

(DOCX)

S2 File. Trachoma data set.

(DOCX)

S3 File. Observation check list.

(CSV)

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the zonal health departments and district health offices for their cooperation. Also, our appreciation goes to the guardians of the children who participated in this study for their time and valuable responses. Finally, we would like to thank data collectors and supervisors for their dedication.

Data Availability

The data is included with the submission as a supporting file.

Funding Statement

Mizan-Tepi University (https://mtu.mizantepiuniversity.net/) funded this research under the broader research theme ‘prevalence of selected neglected tropical diseases among school-age children in Southwest Ethiopia's regional state’ by the reference number MTU/59/136/44/21 on February 2, 2021. The grant recipients were DG and FW. Mizan-Tepi University announced a call for the proposal, provided the research theme, evaluated the proposal, and supervised the overall research project management. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, the decision to publish, or the preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Taylor HR, Burton MJ, Haddad D, West S, Wright H. Trachoma. The Lancet. 2014;384(9960):2142–52. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62182-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Last A, Versteeg B, Shafi Abdurahman O, Robinson A, Dumessa G, Abraham Aga M, et al. Detecting extra-ocular Chlamydia trachomatis in a trachoma-endemic community in Ethiopia: Identifying potential routes of transmission. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14(3):e0008120. Epub 20200304. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008120 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Neglected Tropical Disease [Internet]. WHO. 2018 [cited 29/11/2018]. http://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/diseases/en/.
  • 4.Hotez PJ, Aksoy S, Brindley PJ, Kamhawi S. What constitutes a neglected tropical disease? PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2020;14(1):e0008001. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ntuli MM, editor. Ending the neglect to attain the Sustainable Development Goals: a road map for neglected tropical diseases 2021–2030. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Solomon AW, Kello AB, Bangert M, West SK, Taylor HR, Tekeraoi R, et al. The simplified trachoma grading system, amended. Bulletin of the World Health Organization: World Health Organization; 2020. p. 698–705. doi: 10.2471/BLT.19.248708 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ramadhani AM, Derrick T, Holland MJ, Burton MJ. Blinding Trachoma: Systematic Review of Rates and Risk Factors for Progressive Disease. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2016;10(8):e0004859. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004859 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Abu el-Asrar AM, Geboes K, Tabbara KF, al-Kharashi SA, Missotten L, Desmet V. Immunopathogenesis of conjunctival scarring in trachoma. Eye (Lond). 1998;12 (Pt 3a):453–60. doi: 10.1038/eye.1998.104 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Thylefors B, Dawson CR, Jones BR, West SK, Taylor HR. A simple system for the assessment of trachoma and its complications. Bull World Health Organ. 1987;65(4):477–83. Epub 1987/01/01. . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Hotez PJ S L, Fenwick A. Neglected Tropical Diseases of the Middle East and North Africa: Review of Their Prevalence, Distribution, and Opportunities for Control. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2012;6(2). doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001475 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.WHO. WHO Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by 2020: progress report, 2019. World Health Organization, Diseases CoNT; 2020.
  • 12.Gebrie A, Alebel A, Zegeye A, Tesfaye B, Wagnew F. Prevalence and associated factors of active trachoma among children in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):1073. Epub 20191221. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4686-8 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Delelegn D, Tolcha A, Beyene H, Tsegaye B. Status of active trachoma infection among school children who live in villages of open field defecation: a comparative cross-sectional study. BMC public health. 2021;21(1):2051. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12106-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kassim K, Kassim J, Aman R, Abduku M, Tegegne M, Sahiledengle B. Prevalence of active trachoma and associated risk factors among children of the pastoralist population in Madda Walabu rural district, Southeast Ethiopia: a community-based cross-sectional study. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2019;19(1):353. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-3992-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nigusie A, Berhe R, Gedefaw M. Prevalence and associated factors of active trachoma among childeren aged 1–9 years in rural communities of Gonji Kolella district, West Gojjam zone, North West Ethiopia. BMC Research Notes. 2015;8(1):641. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1529-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Melkie G, Azage M, Gedamu G. Prevalence and associated factors of active trachoma among children aged 1–9 years old in mass drug administration graduated and non-graduated districts in Northwest Amhara region, Ethiopia: A comparative cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0243863. Epub 20201215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243863 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Tadesse B, Worku A, Kumie A, Yimer SA. The burden of and risk factors for active trachoma in the North and South Wollo Zones of Amhara Region, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Infect Dis Poverty. 2017;6(1):143. Epub 20171009. doi: 10.1186/s40249-017-0358-3 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.WoldeKidan E, Daka D, Legesse D, Laelago T, Betebo B. Prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among children aged 1 to 9 years in rural communities of Lemo district, southern Ethiopia: community based cross sectional study. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):886. Epub 20191024. doi: 10.1186/s12879-019-4495-0 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Ferede AT, Dadi AF, Tariku A, Adane AA. Prevalence and determinants of active trachoma among preschool-aged children in Dembia District, Northwest Ethiopia. Infect Dis Poverty. 2017;6(1):128. Epub 20171009. doi: 10.1186/s40249-017-0345-8 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.WHO. Trachoma 2022. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/trachoma.
  • 21.Mengitsu B, Shafi O, Kebede B, Kebede F, Worku DT, Herero M, et al. Ethiopia and its steps to mobilize resources to achieve 2020 elimination and control goals for neglected tropical diseases webs joined can tie a lion. Int Health. 2016;8 Suppl 1(suppl_1):i34–52. doi: 10.1093/inthealth/ihw007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.WHO. WHO Alliance for the Global Elimination of Blinding Trachoma by the year 2020. Progress report on elimination of trachoma, 2013. Releve epidemiologique hebdomadaire. 2014;89(39):421–8. Epub 2014/10/03. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Bangert M, Molyneux DH, Lindsay SW, Fitzpatrick C, Engels D. The cross-cutting contribution of the end of neglected tropical diseases to the sustainable development goals. Infect Dis Poverty. 2017;6(1):73. Epub 20170404. doi: 10.1186/s40249-017-0288-0 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.FMOHE. The Third National Neglected Tropical Diseases Strategic Plan 2021–2025. In: Ministry of Health D, Disease Prevention and Control Directorate editor. Adiss ababa: Federal Ministry of Health of Ethiopia; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.WHO. WHO Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma by 2020: progress report on elimination of trachoma, 2020. World Health Organization, 2021 6 AUGUST 2021. Report No.
  • 26.Andualem Z, Dagne H, Azene ZN, Taddese AA, Dagnew B, Fisseha R, et al. Households access to improved drinking water sources and toilet facilities in Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis based on 2016 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey. BMJ Open. 2021;11(3):e042071. Epub 20210318. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042071 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.FDRE. Summary and Statistical Report of the 2007 Population and Housing Census Results. Addis Ababa: Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia; 2018.
  • 28.WHO. simplified trachoma grading system. Community Eye Health. Geneva PMC free article; 2004. p. 68. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.WHO. Global nutrition monitoring framework: operational guidance for tracking progress in meeting targets for 2025 Geneva2017. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241513609.
  • 30.CDC N. Assessing Access to Water & Sanitation. In: Foodborne W, and Environmental Diseases at CDC, editor.: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID),; 2017.
  • 31.Alambo MM, Lake EA, Bitew Workie S, Wassie AY. Prevalence of Active Trachoma and Associated Factors in Areka Town, South Ethiopia, 2018. Interdiscip Perspect Infect Dis. 2020;2020:8635191. Epub 20201016. doi: 10.1155/2020/8635191 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.FDREMOH. National Neglected Tropical Diseases Master Plan 2015/16–2019/20 (2008–2012 EFY). In: Health Mo, editor. Second Edition ed. Addis Ababa: Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Health; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Glagn Abdilwohab M, Hailemariam Abebo Z. High Prevalence of Clinically Active Trachoma and Its Associated Risk Factors Among Preschool-Aged Children in Arba Minch Health and Demographic Surveillance Site, Southern Ethiopia. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020;14:3709–18. Epub 20201102. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S282567 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Genet A, Dagnew Z, Melkie G, Keleb A, Motbainor A, Mebrat A, et al. Prevalence of active trachoma and its associated factors among 1–9 years of age children from model and non-model kebeles in Dangila district, northwest Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2022;17(6):e0268441. Epub 20220615. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268441 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Asres M, Endeshaw M, Yeshambaw M. Prevalence and Risk Factors of Active Trachoma among Children in Gondar Zuria District North Gondar, Ethiopia. Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2016;01(01). doi: 10.21767/2572-5483.100005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Ayelgn K, Guadu T, Getachew A. Low prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among children aged 1–9 years in rural communities of Metema District, Northwest Ethiopia: a community based cross-sectional study. Ital J Pediatr. 2021;47(1):114. Epub 20210517. doi: 10.1186/s13052-021-01064-x . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Basha GW, Woya AA, Tekile AK. Prevalence and risk factors of active trachoma among primary school children of Amhara Region, Northwest Ethiopia. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020;68(5):750–4. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_143_19 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Balakrishnan VS. WHO’s 2021& 2013;30 roadmap for neglected tropical diseases. The Lancet Microbe. 2021;2(1):e11. doi: 10.1016/S2666-5247(20)30227-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Favacho J, Alves da Cunha AJL, Gomes STM, Freitas FB, Queiroz MAF, Vallinoto ACR, et al. Prevalence of trachoma in school children in the Marajo Archipelago, Brazilian Amazon, and the impact of the introduction of educational and preventive measures on the disease over eight years. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(2):e0006282. Epub 20180215. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006282 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Xue W, Lu L, Zhu J, He X, He J, Zhao R, et al. A Cross-Sectional Population-Based Survey of Trachoma among Migrant School Aged Children in Shanghai, China. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:8692685. Epub 20160817. doi: 10.1155/2016/8692685 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Negrel AD, Mariotti SP. Trachoma rapid assessment: rationale and basic principles. Community Eye Health. 1999;12(32):51–3. . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Emerson PM, Bailey RL. Trachoma and fly control. Community Eye Health. 1999;12(32):57. Epub 2007/05/12. . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011846.r001

Decision Letter 0

Joseph M Vinetz

8 Jul 2023

Dear Mr Getachew,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Magnitude and factors associated with Active Trachoma among Pre-school and School-Aged children in Southwest of Ethiopia" for consideration at PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. In light of the reviews (below this email), we would like to invite the resubmission of a significantly-revised version that takes into account the reviewers' comments.

We cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is also likely to be sent to reviewers for further evaluation.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 60 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email. Please note that revised manuscripts received after the 60-day due date may require evaluation and peer review similar to newly submitted manuscripts.

Thank you again for your submission. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Joseph M. Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Joseph Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: Objectives not clearly stated. the sampling procedures not clear. e.g., from the study region it's difficult to know the number of kebeles, to have a picture that they were representative. Looks like the authors used multi-stage sampling and would be nice to say from zones how the Woredas an kebeles were selected because the zone I do believe don't have equal Woredas/Kebeles. this would also enable proper description of study population and ensure bias is eliminated through stratification. the sample size is difficult to say weather is adequate because of limited information.

confidentiality of the data, being safe is not well stated.

Reviewer #2: The objectives of the study are mentioned and the study design is appropriate. However the term prevalence would be more appropriate than magnitude in the objective. The title includes preschool children whereas the study was on school children only. This needs correction. The study population is described and appropriate. Sample size is adequate. Ethical considerations should include informed written consent ( not just written consent) and should mention the amount of time permitted from administering the consent by researchers to provision of consent by the participant. The entire manuscript needs copy editing for language and grammar for better understanding

Reviewer #3: The language is confusing and hard to follow.

Proofreading is mandatory.

Validation of the used questionnaire in trachoma?

Was it used in the native language?

--------------------

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: the results are clearly presented.

Reviewer #2: There has been data collected which has not been included in the analysis in the study for example socio-demographics such as marital state, income, educational status, etc, and even other observational data such as cleanliness of nails etc. All this data is irrelevant as it is not a part of the analysis.

The results are not clear. The figures stated in the table do not match the figures in the manuscript, for example line 306 and 307 in the manuscript says that the the odds for trachoma was 2.35 times higher among children from houses having hand washing facility, whereas in table 2 the odds ratio is 1.2 for those children from houses wit NO handwashing facility. Please reconcile.

Similarly the statement in Discussion line 298,299 and 300 is contradictory to the results in table 2.

Reviewer #3: Review tables and figure labels and numbers

the word "SALES" in the third fig?

--------------------

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: the limitations not well articulated. the authors poorly discuss how the data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic.

the topic is very relevant in public health, but little is addressed.

Reviewer #2: Conclusions are contrary to the data presented as mentioned above. Recommendations are vague and not specific. This study is identical in design to another study carried out in a different area of Ethiopia in preschool children with similar findings and relevant conclusions. ( Reference no 2) What would be interesting however is to discuss the reasons for the significant difference in prevalence in both these studies which has not been done. Other than this difference and its explanation this study has not furthered our understanding of trachoma and its determinants.

Reviewer #3: in the discussion section, it would be catching to the readers' eyes to summarize the reports [23, 28, 39-44], [45, 46] in a table.

--------------------

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: Line 266-268: And the odds of trachoma 267 infection was 2.23 times higher among those children who wash their hand after toilet 268 [AOR = 2.23(95% CI: 1.09,2.56)]. This contradicts line 273-274. Authors to relook at the data to ensure its not contradicting what the data says.

Reviewer #2: The entire manuscript needs a good copy editing for better accuracy brevity and clarity. The figures need proper titles. The pie chart for prevalence of trachoma has a title 'Sales'.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: Dear Editor,

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to review this paper. The paper addresses an import topic for sub-saharan Africa where Trachoma is endemic yet can be controlled. The Authors have tried to bring out the factors associated with active trachoma among school-aged children. The factors they present are very well know fact the only addition is that this information comes from a new area where such information has not been collected. I do believe they would make this study strong if they looked at the factors of affecting the trachoma elimination in the area as they have alluded to in line 294.

The objective is not well stated in the article apart from the abstract and there is lot of grammar that need to be corrected to make some statements clear to the reader. The use of abbreviation is common and not expounded e.g., HH could mean hand hygiene.

I would recommend the authors to relook at their data analysis and presentation to really make a n impact of the data collected. They seem to be mixing those with higher odds of getting the trachoma.

Authors need to also make the reader have a clear picture of the area of study, by explaining the various division of the areas to general acceptable divisions like towns or villages or clusters. For example, its hand to understand what Woreda and Kebeles means. Are they equivalent of a village or a town or division/district.

In the discussion authors also need to bring out the factors they found as associated with trachoma how it’s different with other published work elsewhere or similar and how does that help with interventions being put in place in Ethiopia.

Reviewer #2: Design of the study is good, however lot of extraneous data has been collected which does not form a part of the analysis and is not discussed and hence irrelevant and also unethical. There is no novelty value and hence the significance, unless it can be shown in the discussion of this study, how it is different from previous ones carried out in Ethiopia on this subject. The general execution has been satisfactorily rigorous but the scholarship leaves a lot to be desired.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Professor Dr Cynthia Arunachalam

Reviewer #3: Yes: Taher Eleiwa

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Attachment

Submitted filename: PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: PNTD-D-23-00338_reviewer.pdf

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011846.r003

Decision Letter 1

Joseph M Vinetz

25 Oct 2023

Dear Mr Getachew,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "High prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia" for consideration at PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the attention to an important topic. Based on the reviews, we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication, providing that you modify the manuscript according to the review recommendations.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 30 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to all review comments, and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Joseph M. Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Joseph Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #2: Issues mentioned in the previous review have been addressed in the revised manuscript. However it will be ethical to mention in the manuscript, that the data collected in this study is a part of a larger database which was collected to assess the magnitude of NTDs in the region

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #2: Issues mentioned in the previous review have largely been addressed. However there are some glaring errors. For example the conclusion states that improved water source and improved sanitation is associated with increased prevalence of active trachoma, whereas in the same conclusion it is stated that presence of animal feces near the HH is associated with increased active trachoma. there is need to use appropriate language or else the meaning conveyed is exactly the opposite.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #2: Conclusions need to be rewritten keeping in mind the meaning to be conveyed. The likely reasons for the gender disparity needs to explained better. Limitations need to be rewritten for better clarity of the points raised.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #2: The whole manuscript needs a proper copy editing for language and grammar. For example: in the introduction part of the abstract, the second sentence begins with a 'Which'. There are spelling mistakes such as bing for being etc,

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

--------------------

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #2: The issues raised in the previous review have been addressed satisfactorily, except for the language and grammar editing.

Reviewer #3: The authors did well in the revision, however few concerns are raised.

1- Several typos and grammatical errors, for example, the 2nd sentence in the conclusion (same one in the authors summary doc), the word "cheek list", "Inanition"....etc.

2- Regarding the validation, the authors' response is not identical the the text cited. Also, this is not the ideal validation. What was the result of this pilot testing; not mentioned in the results.

--------------------

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr Cynthia Arunahalam

Reviewer #3: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

References

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article's retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011846.r005

Decision Letter 2

Joseph M Vinetz

5 Dec 2023

Dear Mr Getachew,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'High prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Joseph M. Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Joseph Vinetz

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************************************************

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011846.r006

Acceptance letter

Joseph M Vinetz

11 Dec 2023

Dear Mr Getachew,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "High prevalence of active trachoma and associated factors among school-aged children in Southwest Ethiopia," has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

We have now passed your article onto the PLOS Production Department who will complete the rest of the publication process. All authors will receive a confirmation email upon publication.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any scientific or type-setting errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript. Note: Proofs for Front Matter articles (Editorial, Viewpoint, Symposium, Review, etc...) are generated on a different schedule and may not be made available as quickly.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, the early version of your manuscript will be published online unless you opted out of this process. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Questionnaire.

    (DOCX)

    S2 File. Trachoma data set.

    (DOCX)

    S3 File. Observation check list.

    (CSV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PNTD-D-23-00338_reviewer.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response to Reviewer.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The data is included with the submission as a supporting file.


    Articles from PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES