Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2020 Dec 7;14(12):e0008597. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008597

Post-intervention epidemiology of STH in Bangladesh: Data to sustain the gains

Sanjaya Dhakal 1,#, Mohammad Jahirul Karim 2,#, Abdullah Al Kawsar 2,, Jasmine Irish 1,, Mujibur Rahman 2, Cara Tupps 1, Ashraful Kabir 1,, Rubina Imtiaz 1,*,#
Editor: Antonio Montresor3
PMCID: PMC7746288  PMID: 33284834

Abstract

In 2008, Bangladesh initiated Preventive Chemotherapy (PCT) for school-age children (SAC) through bi-annual school-based mass drug administration (MDA) to control Soil-Transmitted Helminth (STH) infections. In 2016, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare’s Program on Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination and STH (ELFSTH) initiated district-level community impact assessments with Children Without Worms (CWW) using standardized, population-based sampling to measure the post-intervention STH burden across all ages (≥ 1 yr) for the three STH species. The Integrated Community-based Survey for Program Monitoring (ICSPM) was developed by CWW and was used to survey 12 districts in Bangladesh from 2017–2020. We excluded the first two district data as piloting caused some sampling errors and combined the individual demographic and parasite-specific characteristics from the subsequent 10 districts, linking them with the laboratory data for collective analysis. Our analysis identified district-specific epidemiologic findings, important for program decisions. Of the 17,874 enrolled individuals, our results are based on 10,824 (61.0%) stool samples. Overall, the prevalence of any STH species was substantially reduced to 14% from 79.8% in 2005. The impact was similar across all ages. STH prevalence was 14% in 10 districts collectively, but remained high in four districts, despite their high reported PCT coverage in previous years. Among all, Bhola district was unique because it was the only district with high T.trichuris prevalence. Bangladesh successfully lowered STH prevalence across all ages despite targeting SAC only. Data from the survey indicate a significant number of adults and pre-school age children (PSAC) were self-deworming with purchased pills. This may account for the flat impact curve across all ages. Overall prevalence varied across surveyed districts, with persistent high transmission in the northeastern districts and a district in the central flood zone, indicating possible service and ecological factors. Discrepancies in the impact between districts highlight the need for district-level data to evaluate program implementation after consistent high PCT coverage.

Author summary

Bangladesh government conducted school-based mass drug administration (MDA) for over 10 years to control soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections. School-based evaluations of MDA indicate a reduction in STH burden among school-aged children (SAC). To further assess the impact on the community, Children Without Worms and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare’s Program on Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination and STH (ELFSTH) initiated district-level community impact surveys in 12 districts. We share the results from the latter 10 districts here (the first two pilots were excluded because of possible sampling errors).

Our analysis of 10,824 interviews and stool samples from 10 districts showed an estimated 14% of community members infected with at least one species of STH. This finding is substantially lower than the baseline STH prevalence (79.8%) estimated in 2005. Bangladesh’s successful impact was achieved across all ages despite only treating SAC. Deworming source data showed significant numbers of adults and pre-school age children (PSAC) self-dewormed with locally purchased pills. Prevalence varied across the surveyed districts, with persistent high transmission in the northeastern districts and a district in the central flood zone, indicating possible ecological and service factors contributing to persistent infections. Variable impact across districts highlights the need for sub-national level data to evaluate program performance following the consistent high intervention and could be attributable to many additional factors.

Introduction

In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended that member states control Soil-Transmitted Helminthiasis (STH) morbidity through preventive chemotherapy (PCT) in endemic regions. The recommended guidance utilizes a school-based platform to target one high-risk group, school-age children (SAC) through mass drug administration (MDA) to achieve at least 75% coverage consistently for five years. Once this is achieved, an impact assessment survey is recommended [1]. Like many developing countries, Bangladesh bears a high burden of STH. An estimated national STH prevalence of 79.8% (44% of which was moderate-to-high intensity infection, MHII, of A. ascaris) among school-aged Bangladeshi children was reported in 2005 [2]. By January 2020, Bangladesh had completed 23 rounds of school-based bi-annual MDA with Mebendazole. Bangladesh receives the largest Mebendazole donation of all endemic countries (approximately 20% of the global donation) and has an excellent supply chain record over the past 5 years (SCF-NTD data: CWW retrieved 15 June 2020).

Annual coverage data from Bangladesh indicates consistent coverage of greater than 75% for more than five years before the Integrated Community-based Survey for Program Monitoring (ICSPM) surveys began in 2017 [3]. Previously, PCT coverage data was used as a proxy to indirectly evaluate the impact of deworming on the STH burden [3,4]. A major limitation of this approach was the inability to assess the true burden of disease in the community at risk because; 1.) MDA targets only SAC (a small proportion of the at-risk population), 2.) the quality of coverage data is not tested, and 3.) targeted parasites have variable sensitivity to the single drug used for MDAs [5,6]. Additionally, PCT coverage data does not include children outside schools and adults. Available evidence indicates that these additional risk populations such as pre-school-age children (PSAC) and adults, particularly women of reproductive age (WRA) are also at risk of STH infection and share a substantial disease burden [79].

Therefore, to better understand the community-level program impact, the Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination and STH (ELFSTH) Program of the Bangladesh Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (MOHFW) collaborated with Children Without Worms (CWW) to conduct community-level impact assessment surveys called Integrated Community-based Survey for Program Monitoring (ICSPM) from 2017 to 2020. The main objectives of the surveys were:

  1. To estimate the statistically valid prevalence of STH infection and prevalence of moderate to high-intensity infection (MHII) in PSAC, SAC, and adults (greater than 14 years old), powered to the district level, and

  2. To evaluate potential correlates of STH infection rates including sanitation & hygiene behaviors (household level) and history and source of deworming (individual level).

In this paper, we present the results of concatenated data from surveys conducted between 2017 and 2020, focusing on parasite- and age-specific prevalence and infection intensity as well as the geographic variation of STH prevalence. This paper also presents how these results are applicable for use by the ELFSTH program towards future program actions, and how this approach can assist other similarly advanced NTD programs around the world.

Methods

Ethics statement

Participation in the survey was voluntary and participants provided verbal consent before the main survey. Ethical clearance was obtained through the Bangladesh Medical Research Council (BMRC), who reviewed and approved the survey protocol.

Study design

ICSPM surveys were conducted in 12 districts, representing 7 out of 8 divisions across Bangladesh. The districts were selected by the Bangladesh ELFSTH according to programmatic priorities. The objectives of the surveys were to evaluate the impact of MDA at the community level for each parasite and each risk group, to validate deworming pill intake and pill source within six months before the survey, and to assess the effect of select WASH variables at the household level. Based on age, we defined three risk groups as follows:

  • 1–4 years old: pre-school age children (PSAC)

  • 5–14 years old: school-age children (SAC)

  • greater than 14 years old (adults)

The district was selected by the Bangladesh ELFSTH as an ideal evaluation unit (EU), as the district is the most common administrative unit for implementation decisions where these results could be utilized. While 12 districts were surveyed in all, the first two districts (Bandarban and Nilphamari) were surveyed as a pilot to test the sampling methodology and gain field experience. As some of the sampled clusters were changed by the field teams due to local challenges, we decided to exclude these two district results leaving us with 10 district data for the current analysis. The gap between the survey and the previous deworming event was at least five months in all districts. Fig 1 shows the years of each survey for the 10 districts.

Fig 1. Geographical distribution of surveyed districts, year of survey, and STH prevalence range.

Fig 1

The ICSPM survey is a community-based, cross-sectional survey based on probability proportional to size sampling (PPSS). The details of the ICSPM survey methodology is available on the CWW website (http://www.childrenwithoutworms.org/). Briefly, the survey design entails a cross-sectional, mixed cluster & random systematic sample methodology and has been previously detailed [10]. The ICSPM methodology primarily relies on WHO’s “Assessing the epidemiology of STH during a transmission assessment survey [11]. We targeted a sample size of 332 for each risk group, which gave us one-sided 95% confidence for determining if the <10% prevalence, action threshold was achieved. Since the average non-response rate in the first two pilot districts was around 40%, we enrolled 465 individuals in each risk group in subsequent districts to account for this. The sampling interval was based on the proportion of each risk group within the population. The survey team used the Survey Sample Builder (SSB) tool, which was adapted to the ICSPM methodology, an excel program developed by Neglected Tropical Diseases Support Center, The Task Force for Global Health (TFGH) to select clusters and risk groups within the households.

We used the Kato-Katz method to identify and count the eggs of STH parasites following standard WHO methodology using two slides per stool specimen. Stools samples were analyzed on the same day as collected, being transported to the laboratory in a cooler box within three hours of collection. Ten percent of slides were tested blindly by another laboratory scientist for quality control. Three data sets (Household, Individual, and Laboratory) were downloaded from the secure cloud-based data-hosting platform and saved in local computers at CWW, Atlanta. After basic data cleaning, household data were first merged with individual data and later with laboratory data making one linked data file for each district. We recoded and reformatted variables as necessary to align across the districts before combining the individual data files from surveyed districts. Finally, we prepared one analytical data file for this report by stacking 10 individual data files from each of the surveyed districts. According to the 2011 national population census, the results presented here are statistically representative of about 14.1% of the Bangladeshi citizen living in those 10 districts.

We used SAS version 9.4 (SAS Inc., Cary NC, USA) to manage and analyze the data. We accounted for the cluster sample survey design in all analyses using appropriate SAS procedures. Chi-square (χ2) test was used to assess differences in prevalence between risk groups and p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered significant. Since the survey was powered to detect the prevalence of STH and MHII down to a threshold of ≥10% at the district level, only upper sided, 95% confidence limits are reported. We also ran some explorative analyses at the sub-district level, which lacked statistical power but provide useful insights for further program actions.

Results

Basic characteristics

Of 17,874 enrollees, 11,022 (61.7%) provided stool samples for laboratory examination. Subsequently, 198 (1.6%) stool sample records were excluded during the data cleaning process due to;

  1. IDs present in only one dataset

  2. duplicate IDs with mismatching data across other variables, and

  3. data entry errors.

The final “clean” dataset had 10,824 records which were used for the analysis presented here (Fig 2). The 3-most commonly reported occupation among responders were students (34.6%) housewives (25.6%), other (21.8%).

Fig 2. Flow chart of sample selection and final number of observations.

Fig 2

Among the 6,852 (38.3%) participants who did not provide samples, males (40.3%) were less likely to provide a stool specimen compared to their female (38.8%) counterparts (p-value 0.04). Similarly, fewer PSAC (41.1%) and SAC (40.1%) provided stool specimens compared to adults (36.8%), p-value <0.001. We believe that adults may have a more regulated bowel routine while younger kids cannot be forced to produce it at a given time.

Prevalence and Intensity of STH Infections

The overall prevalence of any STH infection in 10 districts was 14.0% (Fig 3). There was no statistical difference in the prevalence of STH infection across the risk groups. We did not observe statistically different prevalence between females (14.4%) and males (13.4%). Of the three tested parasites, A. lumbricoides was the most common (10.5%) followed by T. trichuris (4.4%). The prevalence of hookworm was less than 1% in all risk groups. Three districts with the highest STH prevalence were Sunamganj (40.4%), Bhola (36.5%), and Sirajganj (26.9%). In contrast, Satkhira (2.0%), Jhenaidah (2.4%), and Manikganj (3.1%) had the lowest STH prevalence (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Prevalence of any STH infection by district and age group.

Fig 3

Overall, the intensity of STH MHII in the 10 districts was 3.3%. Bhola (10.6%), Sunamganj (10.4%), Sirajganj (7.1%), and Moulvibazar (3.6%) were four districts with MHII above the WHO-recommended threshold of <1%, while the remaining 6 districts had achieved this goal with MHII ranging from 0.0% to 0.2% (Table 1). This is a significant achievement for the national program and signifies the achievement of the WHO goal of eliminating STH morbidity in majority districts.

Table 1. Intensity of STH morbidity by district.

District Intensity of STH Morbidity among All (Prevalence %) All Ages (%)
PSAC SAC Adults
Sirajganj 7.0 6.6 7.8 7.1
Sunamganj 12.2 8.6 10.2 10.4
Bhola 12.0 11.1 8.5 10.6
Moulvibazar 3.6 4.8 2.4 3.6
All 10-districts 3.6 3.4 2.7 3.3

We further explored three high prevalence (>20%) districts Sunamganj, Bhola, and Sirajganj to understand if there were any geographic concentrations of STH infection at the sub-district level. Fig 4 illustrates the STH prevalence by sub-districts in these three high-prevalence districts. The prevalence of STH was higher than 50% in two sub-districts (Dowara Bazar and Dakshin Sunamganj) of Sunamganj and one sub-district (Belkuchi) of Sirajganj district.

Fig 4. STH prevalence by sub-district in the surveyed districts with the highest prevalence.

Fig 4

History of deworming

The proportion of self-reported deworming was highest among SAC (75.6%) followed by adults (69.1%) and PSAC (51.9%) for the 9,386 (86.7%) individuals who provided the history of deworming in the previous 6 months (Table 2).

Table 2. History of deworming within the past 6 months.

History of deworming Risk group N (%) All Ages (%)
PSAC SAC Adults
Yes 1053 (37.3) 2733 (75.6) 755 (25.6) 4541 (48.4)
No 1769 (62.7) 884 (24.4) 2192 (74.4) 4845 (51.6)
All 10-districts 2822 (100) 3617 (100) 2947 (100) 9386 (100)

Among responders (n = 7,469) to the query of the location of deworming, 88.6% of SAC reported getting dewormed through school-based MDA, while 85.1% adults and 76.2% of PSAC were dewormed through locally purchased deworming medicines (Fig 5).

Fig 5. Sources of deworming among those who reported receipt of deworming in the previous year.

Fig 5

Discussion

Our study confirms the earlier findings from Bundy et. al. [12] that an impact evaluation of MDA directed at one specific risk group, SAC, may have a significant reduction in STH prevalence across all age groups in a given community. Our study used a much larger sample size with more than 10,000 stool samples and was powered to represent the source district populations. We must emphasize though, that these observed reductions in STH prevalence/intensity, do not imply a causal relationship: that is merely inferred given the multi-year high deworming coverage, earlier estimated prevalence, and our findings.

Our analysis of pooled data from community-based surveys in 10 districts in Bangladesh found a substantial reduction in overall STH prevalence from 79.8% (2005) to 14.0% (2017–2020) across all risk groups after more than 10 years of school-based systematic biannual PCT for SAC. Despite SAC being the only targeted risk group for MDA, the data shows no statistically significant differences in STH prevalence among PSAC, SAC, and adults. Although we did not specifically explore potential impact variables on the community prevalence, we speculate that the following factors might have contributed to this observation:

  1. Change in health-seeking behavior in adults, namely purchasing deworming medication for themselves and family members outside of school (correlates with data on the source of deworming for PSAC and adults). This could be attributed to the positive results of school-based MDA encouraging out-of-school villagers to seek deworming, and

  2. Improved WASH factors have increased access to improved sanitation at the household level.

According to the latest WHO guidance [13], the 2030 goal for STH morbidity elimination is achieved when a country/region reaches <2% MHII. The school survey indicates that Bangladesh has achieved this goal and can halt MDA for 2 years per WHO guidance [14]. However, the population-based ICSPM data for the same risk groups in the same geographic areas shows the true prevalence of intensity to be still > 2. The more granular ICSPM data provides more meaningful guidance to the program, i.e. reducing MDAs in low prevalence areas but increasing interventions in clusters of high transmission that persist.

Therefore, for countries with mature programs that have reached the WHO goal of consistent coverage above 75% for 5 years, we recommend a statistically valid, population-based sampling approach to assess the sub-national level impact on prevalence and intensity of STH for use in data-driven program decision-making or policy adjustments.

Additionally, our analysis revealed that the impact of STH control measures is not uniform across the country: it was significantly reduced in six districts, while the other four still carry a burden of higher prevalence and intensity. Potential factors influencing the impact of MDA on STH prevalence and intensity may be related to the local population and individual characteristics, as well as service processes related to intervention quality such as:

  1. Varied baseline STH prevalence and intensity, according to a report by the Bangladesh MOHFW (2).

  2. Population movement across district borders, bringing the infection from other areas.

  3. The complicated relationship between drug distributors and targeted risk groups.

  4. Variable environmental or ecological characteristics among districts that support longer survival of STH eggs in the soil. As an example, Sunamganj and Sirajganj districts showed persistent high STH prevalence. Both have difficult, remote terrain with poorer, less educated populations, frequent flooding, and unprotected latrines: all promoting STH re-infection and spread (Fig 6).

  5. False rumors or distrust of government programs about the ‘real’ purpose of the treatment, and

  6. Responses to local socio-cultural control measures.

Fig 6. Ecological zone, vegetation type, and climate in each surveyed district.

Fig 6

Additional factors and changes related to differential evolution of improved sanitation, socio-economic and other development indices across and within the surveyed districts could also account for the observed differences in STH burden. While these were outside the scope of this study, we are sharing some national level developmental indices that indicate progress in key areas which could have also influenced STH outcomes. According to Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) data shared by WHO and UNICEF, Bangladesh has made significant improvements in providing access to improved latrines to 52.2% (2017) from 37.9% (2008) of the total population [15].

Similarly World Bank data shows that:

  • the Gross National Income (GNI) per capita has increased more than 165% from USD 660 (2008) to USD 1750 (2018) [16]

  • the infant mortality rate has gone down from 43.2 (2008) to 25.1 (2018) per 1,000 live births, and

  • the prevalence of undernourishment has been declining, life expectancy is continuously increasing and the literacy rate is also going up.

Among high STH prevalent districts, STH prevalence ranged from 5.1% (Kazipur sub-district, Sirajganj) to 71% (Dowara Bazar sub-district, Sunamganj). All corresponding sub-districts (Sunamganj and Bhola), seven of nine sub-districts (Sirajganj), and one of seven sub-districts (Moulvibazar) had a prevalence of more than 20%.

The Bangladesh national NTD program’s STH control office plans to use these survey results to further assess the reasons for persistent high infection-transmission in some sub-districts using standard tools and mixed methods to subsequently design a focused intervention program in these locations. Additionally, the national program may use these findings to make decisions for altering the frequency of MDA programs in the low prevalence districts.

To further explore the consistent impact across all age groups, we reviewed the pill intake and their source data by age group and by district as well as collectively for all 10 districts. This revealed that a large proportion of PSAC and adults reported the purchase of locally available drugs as the primary source of deworming in the past six months. Our findings are similar to those from a school-based survey in Sri Lanka. [17] This finding has potential implications for the national program as it may indicate communal behavioral change towards self-investment in preventive health. This could be a spillover effect of the sustained impact of school deworming in these districts, signaling that school-based MDA and accompanying community messaging raises awareness of the positive health outcomes of deworming, triggering treatment-seeking behavior in community members who do not have access to school MDAs but do have local access to affordable, high quality deworming medicines (Bangladesh generic manufacturers and formulations of benzimidazoles: CWW web-survey, 2019). These initial findings need further exploration and, if confirmed, will be an important factor influencing a national policy of sustainable domestic financing guided by quality disease, socio-behavioral and pharmacological data. Similar behavioral changes should be explored by other national programs that have quality generics available locally for deworming.

Conclusion

After 23 rounds of school-based MDA to lower the burden of STH infection since 2008, a review of survey data from 10 districts in Bangladesh shows that it is close to eliminating the infection as a public health problem from most of the country. The results of these surveys will be critical to sustain the current progress and plan corrective actions. Bangladesh plans to identify and treat all community members at risk in the persistent high-prevalence pockets of geographic areas, such as Sunamganj, Bhola, and Sirajganj. Community-based surveys may serve as better tools for advanced PCT programs to accurately assess the impact of PCT and identify hyperendemic foci that need accelerated interventions. This survey methodology provides additional valuable information on community deworming behavior which needs further validation and studies. Such population-representative results are not available from school-based survey methods.

Limitations

The ICSPM surveys had some limitations including a higher than expected stool nonresponse rate, possible recall bias (particularly the responses to the history and location of deworming questions), and gender inequity among adult respondents. Additionally, the timing between the stool sample deposit by the survey respondents and testing in the laboratory may have been longer than ideal due to geographical challenges. This may have underestimated the hookworm prevalence slightly, but there is only one published study that documents the ideal specimen testing interval for hookworms [18] and additional studies have shown little or no hookworm in south Asia.

It is of note that Bangladesh’s ELFSTH treated 19 LF-endemic districts with Albendazole (also active against STH worms) to control Lymphatic Filariasis (LF) through community-based MDAs from 2001 to 2014. While these LF-focused MDAs also impacted the STH prevalence in those 19 districts, these treatments did not affect ICSPM results as the LF program ceased in 2014 and ICSPM started data collection in 2017. Schistosomiasis is not a significant burden in Bangladesh so the ELFSTH program has not used Praziquantel in the country. Recent use of these drugs, which also affect STH, could have affected our observed results.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all the staff of the respective district & sub-district health officials, field staff, and survey participants in Bangladesh, as well as the multiple CWW team members and consultants who historically contributed to protocol development and early implementation of some surveys. Technical support and field implementation was supported by CWW and the Bangladesh National ELFSTH.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript.

Funding Statement

These surveys were supported with generous funding from Johnson & Johnson (https://www.jnj.com/), Glaxo Smith Kline (https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/home/), and Nutrition International through funding from the Government of Canada. Technical support and field implementation was supported by CWW and the Bangladesh National ELFSTH. The funding is not specific to these surveys and funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.WHO, editor Deworming for health and development: report of the third global meeting of the partners for parasite control.2004; Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.MOHFW. Neglected Tropical Diseases in Bangladesh: Situation Analysis and Gap Analysis Dhaka, Bangladesh: Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of Bangladesh; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Yajima A, Mikhailov A, Mbabazi PS, Gabrielli AF, Minchiotti S, Montresor A, et al. Preventive Chemotherapy and Transmission Control (PCT) databank: a tool for planning, implementation and monitoring of integrated preventive chemotherapy for control of neglected tropical diseases. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2012;106(4):215–22. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2012.01.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kabatereine NB, Malecela M, Lado M, Zaramba S, Amiel O, Kolaczinski JH. How to (or not to) integrate vertical programmes for the control of major neglected tropical diseases in sub-Saharan Africa. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2010;4(6):e755 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000755 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Parker M, Allen T. Does mass drug administration for the integrated treatment of neglected tropical diseases really work? Assessing evidence for the control of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminths in Uganda. Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:3 10.1186/1478-4505-9-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Dunn JC, Bettis AA, Wyine NY, Lwin AMM, Tun A, Maung NS, et al. Soil-transmitted helminth reinfection four and six months after mass drug administration: results from the delta region of Myanmar. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(2):e0006591 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006591 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Benjamin-Chung J, Nazneen A, Halder AK, Haque R, Siddique A, Uddin MS, et al. The Interaction of Deworming, Improved Sanitation, and Household Flooring with Soil-Transmitted Helminth Infection in Rural Bangladesh. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9(12):e0004256 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004256 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Fleming FM, Matovu F, Hansen KS, Webster JP. A mixed methods approach to evaluating community drug distributor performance in the control of neglected tropical diseases. Parasit Vectors. 2016;9(1):345 10.1186/s13071-016-1606-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Gyorkos TW, Montresor A, Belizario V, Biggs BA, Bradley M, Brooker SJ, et al. The right to deworming: The case for girls and women of reproductive age. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(11):e0006740 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006740 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Davlin SL, Jones AH, Tahmina S, Kawsar AA, Joshi A, Zaman SI, et al. Soil-transmitted helminthiasis in four districts in Bangladesh: household cluster surveys of prevalence and intervention status. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):672. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.WHO. Assessing the epidemiology of STH during TAS. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2015. 44 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bundy DA, Wong MS, Lewis LL, Horton J. Control of geohelminths by delivery of targeted chemotherapy through schools. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1990;84(1):115–20. 10.1016/0035-9203(90)90399-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.WHO. 2030 targets for soil-transmitted helminthiases control programmes Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.WHO/NTD. Helminth control in school age children: a guide for managers of control programmes Second edition Geneva: WHO, diseases Docont; 2011. Report No.: ISBN: 978 92 4 150 312 9. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Joint Monitoring Programme [Internet]. WHO/ UNICEF. 2020 [cited 05 Sept 2020]. Available from: https://washdata.org/data/household#!/table?geo0=country&geo1=BGD.
  • 16.Bank TW. DataBank Microdta Data Catalog: Bangladesh The World Bank; [GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$)]. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/country/bangladesh?view=chart.
  • 17.Ediriweera DS, Gunawardena S, Gunawardena NK, Iddawela D, Kannathasan S, Murugananthan A, et al. Reassessment of the prevalence of soil-transmitted helminth infections in Sri Lanka to enable a more focused control programme: a cross-sectional national school survey with spatial modelling. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7(9):e1237–e46. 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30253-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Dacombe RJ, Crampin AC, Floyd S, Randall A, Ndhlovu R, Bickle Q, et al. Time delays between patient and laboratory selectively affect accuracy of helminth diagnosis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2007;101(2):140–5. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2006.04.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008597.r001

Decision Letter 0

Antonio Montresor, Marco Coral-Almeida

18 Aug 2020

Dear Dr. Imtiaz,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Post-intervention Epidemiology of STH in Bangladesh: data to sustain the gains" 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,

Antonio Montresor

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marco Coral-Almeida

Deputy 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: See below

Reviewer #2: In various places (eg pages 9 and 12) it is stated that 12 Districts were surveyed and data from 10 of these are reported here. I can't see the criteria for reporting a subset of data. If this is a partial view based on a decision of the authors this could result in significant bias. A clear explanation is essential.

It would be helpful to cite the sources of ethical clearance in the methods (they are attached to the file, but should be transparent to the reader of the paper too).

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: P13 line 80 states "According to the 2011 national population census, this analysis

represents about 15.5% of the Bangladesh population". It is unclear what this means. The sample is around 11,000 people, the population of Bangladesh is 160 million, so the sample is much less than 1%.

The enrolled sample is 17k and the specimens submitted are 11k, so almost 40% unsampled. Collecting stool specimens is notoriously difficult, but this seems a particularly low compliance. It is necessary to present an analysis of whether the compliance conceals bias: eg by gender, by age, locality etc. So that an assessment can be made of the consequences of the 40% under-sampling.

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: page 17 line 130 states:To our knowledge, this is the first time an impact evaluation of MDA directed at one

specific risk group, SAC, has shown a significant reduction in STH prevalence across all age groups in a given community. Suggest checking this reference which shows this: Bundy, D.A.P., Wong, M.S., Lewis, L. and Horton, J. (1990) Control of geohelminths by delivery of targeted chemotherapy through schools. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 84, 115-120.

page 19 line 176: This is a rather limited list of possible explanations for variatiosn in outcomes across districts. I am particularly surprised to see no mention of two factors known to be important: WASH coverage and economics. At present the discussion is speculative and uninformative. The authors should make this point quantitatively. Data are available for these 10 districts which would allow comparison/ranking using government and/or world bank data on both WASH and the economy.

page 20 194-196: the point about the transition from MDA to a mixture of self-purchasing in better off areas and MDA in poorer is important. There should be specific reference here to the work of Nilanthi Da Silva on exactly this topic in Sri Lanka, where public MDA only now persists in the poorest "plantation" areas. If the authors here rank districts by economics (the point above) then they could make this call specifically.

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: NA

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: General: Dhakal and co-authors present a well-written account of a rigorous survey on soil-transmitted helminth (STH) prevalence and selected risk factors across Bangladesh. Such high-quality studies are invaluable for program management, and are examples for other programs facing the question whether to continue interventions or adapt to changing conditions.

A few comments are offered for clarification and discussion:

- Line 45: It is unclear how the survey districts were selected

- Lines 50-51: supposedly, the word “years old” is missing after the figure

- Line 70: provide an estimate on the time lapse between sample production and sample analysis (e.g. “analyzed on the day of sample collection”)

- Line 85: was the survey really powered to detect a certain prevalence of MHII?

- Line 94: the figure given in the abstract and here on the number of individuals submitting stool samples is not identical

- Line 99: basic data on the ~40% who did not provide samples should be provided (variation between districts, age class and sex distribution)

- Line 104: Ascaris, Trichuris: please write the proper species name/abbreviation

- Line 131: the data are intriguing but there is no evidence for causality between school-based MDA and the prevalence reduction. Some points are discussed below, and the authors should be careful to not over-interpret their data or suggest causality.

- Are there any plans to sample districts that were not covered in this survey?

- Is there any information on the timing of sample collection compared to the last deworming event?

- Some abbreviations are used without introduction, or they are introduced after their first use (e.g. ICSPM, ELFSTH)

Reviewer #2: This paper explores an important and topical issue. The finding that treating school children only has an impact on transmission as a whole was made some 40 years ago by R.M.Anderson, but has been demonstrated only rarely (but it has been demonstrated before - see reference in comments above). There is a current trend in the literature to argue for treatment of all ages as essential to significant interruption of transmission to significantly lower levels. This paper is one of a very few to show that this is not necessary. This is such an important and topical point that I am surprised that the authors do not make more of it. School based treatment is so much less costly and easier, which is why the programme has been self-sustainable in Bangladesh.

On a related point, a very novel finding of this study is the very high rates of adult and PSAC self-treatment using out-of-pocket funds. This supports the contention that school based public treatment will be supported by out-of-pocket self treatment by those who can afford to do so. This was the experience in Sri Lanka that led to their being able to refine, reduce and target their school based MDA programme. These are important policy implications that deserve stronger mention.

In describing the outcomes the authors use the figure of 79.8% as the baseline figure from 2005, based on a government report. The details of this baseline survey need to be described here. Was this for the same 10 Districts as here; was it the same age groups; same Dx? etc The authors need to be able to make the case that the comparison with the present result is valid. If it is not, then the very low prevalence seen today still stands as a cross country sampling of the status of infection after treatment, but clearly needs to be presented in that way.

Reviewer #3: Comments and observations

Overall, the manuscript is relevant, well written and with study design according to WHO recommendations. It provides useful information regarding the impact of more than 10 years mass drug administration interesting on prevalence and intensity of STH infections in Bangladesh. Nevertheless, the manuscript needs to be improved regarding some aspects of methodology, results, and discussion.

Methodology:

1) It should be important to describe whether the different districts and communities have comparable characteristics or are in different settings: ecological settings or variation, vegetation, climate, seasonality and water contact activities and behavior.

2) Describe the main occupation of the population and their likely exposure to STH transmission.

3) If possible, the authors should give some information on health facilities in relation to STH: diagnostic facilities, availability of praziquantel.

4) Provide short information regarding WASH activities, hygiene, and sanitation.

5) It is not clear whether the treatment has been provided to the children following the examination

Results

6) The authors should provide additional Table(s) showing the results of prevalence and if possible, the intensity of STH infections in 2005 compared to 2017-2020 in different district to justify the objective of the study.

Discussion

7) Results of differences in prevalence and intensity need to be more explained.

• Why the highest STH prevalence in Sunamganj, Bhola and Sirjganj in contrast to others?

• The same question goes for the intensity.

8) What do specifically, the authors mean by ecological variation?

Recommendation

The manuscript could be accepted after considering the comments and observations with “major changes”

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

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: Yes: Peter Steinmann

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Moussa Sacko, PhD

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, PLOS recommends that you deposit 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. For instructions see http://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/submission-guidelines#loc-materials-and-methods

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008597.r003

Decision Letter 1

Antonio Montresor, Marco Coral-Almeida

23 Oct 2020

Dear Dr. Imtiaz,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Post-intervention epidemiology of STH in Bangladesh: data to sustain the gains' 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,

Antonio Montresor

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marco Coral-Almeida

Deputy 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: See below

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

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 #1: See below

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

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: The authors have adequately addressed the comments by this reviewer.

Reviewer #2: The authors have responded effectively to the reviewers' comments.

Reviewer #3: This is an already revised version of the manuscript. The manuscript is relevant, well written and with study design according to WHO recommendations. It provides useful information regarding the impact of more than 10 years mass drug administration interesting on prevalence and intensity of STH infections in Bangladesh. Overall, the authors have addressed all the points raised and the explanation are acknowledged.

I am sorry for the question No3 regarding praziquantel in methodology. It was related to the availability of drugs recommended for STH (i.e. albendazole or mebendazole) and not praziquantel.

**********

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: Yes: Peter Steinmann

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008597.r004

Acceptance letter

Antonio Montresor, Marco Coral-Almeida

24 Nov 2020

Dear Dr. Imtiaz,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "Post-intervention epidemiology of STH in Bangladesh: data to sustain the gains," 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

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers_Bangla_STH Epid 30 Sept 20.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript.


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

    RESOURCES