Table 2.

the distribution of DAT and PCR tests for the detection of VL positive participants and the different methods used for the collection of sandflies in the study villages

	Villages				Total	P value
	Abukishma	Algadamblia Aljabal	Algadamblia Tirfa	Abualnaja
DAT and PCR results
No. positive for DATa (%)	2 (40.0%)	1 (20.0%)	2 (40.0%)	0 (0.0%)	5 (5.3%)	0.714
No. positive for PCR (%)	19 (54.3%)	2 (5.7%)	7 (20.0%)	7 (20.0%)	35 (36.8%)
No. examined (%)	52 (54.7%)	3 (3.2%)	15 (15.8%)	25 (26.3%)	95 (100%)
Distribution of sandflies
No. (%) caught using PSC	23 (42.6%)	14 (25.9%)	7 (13.0%)	10 (18.5%)	54 (24.5%)	0.006
No. (%) caught using sticky traps	51 (54.8%)	9 (9.7%)	2 (2.2%)	31 (33.3%)	93 (42.3%)
No. (%) caught using CDC light traps	31 (42.5%)	13 (17.8%)	12 (16.4%)	17 (23.3%)	73 (33.2%)
No. (%) of flies caught	105 (47.7%)	36 (16.4%)	21 (9.5%)	58 (26.4%)	220 (100%)

^aTiters were 1:100, 1:200, 1:400, 1:800, 1:1600, 1:3200, 1:6400, 1:12,800, 1:25,600, 1:51,200, and 1:102,400. A titer of ≤ 1:800 was considered negative, a titer of 1:1600 was considered as borderline, and a titer of ≥ 1:3200 was considered positive