Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 16;216(11):1425–1433. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jix496

Table 2.

Comparison of Change From Baseline Prevalence and Mean Intensity for Villages Inside the Hotspot at Year 1 to Villages Outside the Hotspot, 9- to 12-Year-Olds

Comparison All Villages (N = 150) P Matched Villages (N = 42) P
Prevalence PR (95% CI) PR (95% CI)
Change from year 1 to year 2 1.15 (1.05–1.26) .0033 1.08 (0.93–1.25) .2944
Change from year 1 to year 3 1.46 (1.29–1.64) <.0001 1.49 (1.16–1.93) .0022
Change from year 1 to year 4 1.90 (1.61–2.24) <.0001 2.14 (1.65–2.78) <.0001
Change from year 1 to year 5 2.20 (1.88–2.59) <.0001 2.28 (1.57–3.31) <.0001
Mean intensity AMR (95% CI) AMR (95% CI)
Change from year 1 to year 2 1.07 (0.85–1.36) .5585 0.94 (0.68–1.29) .7043
Change from year 1 to year 3 1.49 (1.12–1.99) .0068 2.70 (1.69–4.31) <.0001
Change from year 1 to year 4 1.68 (1.17–2.42) .0053 3.13 (1.97–5.00) <.0001
Change from year 1 to year 5 2.34 (1.70–3.22) <.0001 2.46 (1.28–4.73) .007

All 150 villages are included in first set of analyses, whereas matched villages includes villages inside the year 1 hotspot who were paired with a village outside the hotspot with a similar distance to Lake Victoria (<1 km of difference), baseline prevalence (<10% difference), and the same study arm. Results for prevalence analyses are reported as PRs of the change in prevalence from year 1 and as AMRs for the change in mean intensity from year 1.

Abbreviations: AMRs, arithmetic means ratio; CI, confidence interval; PR, prevelance ratio.