Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2021 Apr 20;15(4):e0009333. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009333

High prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among stunted and control children aged 2 to 5 years old in two neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar

Azimdine Habib 1,*, Lova Andrianonimiadana 1, Maheninasy Rakotondrainipiana 2, Prisca Andriantsalama 2, Ravaka Randriamparany 2, Rindra Vatosoa Randremanana 2, Rado Rakotoarison 3, Inès Vigan-Womas 3,¤a, Armand Rafalimanantsoa 4, Pascale Vonaesch 5,¤b, Philippe J Sansonetti 5,¤c, Jean-Marc Collard 1,¤c; the Afribiota Investigators
Editor: Arunasalam Pathmeswaran6
PMCID: PMC8087024  PMID: 33878113

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to compare the prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations (IPIs) in stunted children, compared to control children, in Ankasina and Andranomanalina Isotry (two disadvantaged neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar), to characterize associated risk factors and to compare IPI detection by real-time PCR and standard microscopy techniques.

Methodology/Principal findings

Fecal samples were collected from a total of 410 children (171 stunted and 239 control) aged 2–5 years. A single stool sample per subject was examined by simple merthiolate-iodine-formaldehyde (MIF), Kato-Katz smear and real-time PCR techniques. A total of 96.3% of the children were infested with at least one intestinal parasite. The most prevalent parasites were Giardia intestinalis (79.5%), Ascaris lumbricoides (68.3%) and Trichuris trichiura (68.0%). For all parasites studied, real-time PCR showed higher detection rates compared to microscopy (G. intestinalis [77.6% (n = 318) versus 20.9% (n = 86)], Entamoeba histolytica [15.8% (n = 65) versus 1.9% (n = 8)] and A. lumbricoides [64.1% (n = 263) versus 50.7% (n = 208)]). Among the different variables assessed in the study, age of 4 to 5 years (AOR = 4.61; 95% CI, (1.35–15.77)) and primary and secondary educational level of the mother (AOR = 12.59; 95% CI, (2.76–57.47); AOR = 9.17; 95% CI, (2.12–39.71), respectively) were significantly associated with IPIs. Children drinking untreated water was associated with infestation with G. intestinalis (AOR = 1.85; 95% CI, (1.1–3.09)) and E. histolytica (AOR = 1.9; 95% CI, (1.07–3.38)). E. histolytica was also associated with moderately stunted children (AOR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.2–0.71). Similarly, children aged between 4 and 5 years (AOR = 3.2; 95% CI (2.04–5.01)) and living on noncemented soil types (AOR = 1.85; 95% CI, (1.18–2.09)) were associated with T. trichiura infestation.

Conclusions/Significance

The prevalence of IPIs is substantial in the studied areas in both stunted and control children, despite the large-scale drug administration of antiparasitic drugs in the country. This high prevalence of IPIs warrants further investigation. Improved health education, environmental sanitation and quality of water sources should be provided.

Author summary

In populations living in adverse conditions due to poverty, a wide variety of intestinal parasite infestations can be observed. These infestations are usually diagnosed by stool microscopy but can be easily overlooked if the procedures used are inaccurate or performed in a suboptimal way. In the present study, we investigated the prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations in stunted and control children aged from 2 to 5 years living in two disadvantaged neighborhoods of Antananarivo Madagascar. We also assessed risk factors for infestations and the diagnostic performance of microscopic techniques and real-time PCR for the detection of parasites. Almost all individuals were found to be infested with at least one parasitic species. Children aged between 4 and 5 years and mothers with low educational levels were found to be associated with infestation. Similarly, children drinking untreated water were associated with G. intestinalis and E. histolytica infestation. This latter species was also associated with moderately stunted children. Children between 4 and 5 years old and with no cemented soil type were associated with T. trichiura infestation. The high prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among the study participants requires the improvement of health education, environmental sanitation and quality of water sources.

Introduction

Intestinal parasitic infections (IPIs) are among the most prevalent infections in humans in low- and middle-income countries. IPIs can be largely categorized into two groups, i.e., helminthic and protozoan infections. Soil-transmitted helminths (STHs) (A. lumbricoides, Ancylostoma duodenale, Necator americanus, Strongyloides stercoralis, and T. trichiura) affect more than 2 billion people worldwide [1]. These species produce a wide array of symptoms, ranging from asymptomatic carriage to diarrhea, abdominal pain, general malaise, and weakness, which may impact learning capacities and physical growth [24]. Infections with pathogenic intestinal protozoa, primarily Cryptosporidium spp. but also to a lesser extent G. intestinalis and E. histolytica are also of considerable public health importance [58]. For instance, among the main infectious diarrheagenic parasites, Cryptosporidium spp. results in the most deaths among children < 5 years of age [7,8]. Hundreds of millions of people may be affected by intestinal protozoa annually [9,10]. However, there are no reliable estimates of the global burden of disease [1113].

In different regions of Madagascar a number of research studies have been conducted on the prevalence of IPIs among children using microscopy-based techniques for the identification of IPI. A cross-sectional study done in remote villages within the Ifanadiana district of Madagascar in 2016 revealed an overall IPIs prevalence of 92.5% for intestinal parasites. Among children between 5 and 14 years old, four different types of intestinal parasites (IPs) were detected and T. trichiura was the most commonly encountered parasite (84.6%) followed by A. lumbricoides (72.4%) [14]. Three different types of IPs were identified in 14 districts of Madagascar in 2008–2009 from children under five years of age suffering or not of diarrheal disease. The overall prevalence was 36.5% and G. intestinalis was the dominant IP (12.6%) followed by Trichomonas intestinalis (6.2%) and E. histolytica (2.0%) [15]. A study in rural areas of Moramanga and Morondava, Madagascar in 2014–2015 indicated 23.6% overall prevalence and the most common parasites identified in Moramanga was A. lumbricoides (16.1%), followed by T. trichiura (3.8%). In Morondava, commensal Entamoeba coli (6%) and Hymenolepis nana (4%) were the most prevalent parasites [16].

Epidemiological information regarding the prevalence and associated factors of IPIs and other diarrheal causing pathogens among children less than 5 years of age is not available in the other regions of the country including Antananarivo, which was our study area. Children less than 5 years of age need special care and follow up because they are more susceptible to intestinal parasites and other infectious pathogens due to their low level of immunity [17].

The relationship between IPIs and malnutrition (stunting, wasting and underweight) has been well documented [1821]. IPIs impair the nutritional status of those infected in many ways. These parasites can induce intestinal bleeding and competition for nutrients, which leads to malabsorption of nutrients. The parasites can also reduce food intake and the ability to use protein and to absorb fat, as well as increasing nutrient wastage by vomiting, diarrhea and loss of appetite [19,20]. These effects lead to protein energy malnutrition, anemia and other nutrient deficiencies [19,20]. Madagascar is a very low-income country (gross national annual income per capita of 420 USD) [22], and the latest data published in 2014 show that the prevalence of stunting among children aged less than 5 years is still approximately 47.4% [23]. Madagascar is among the countries with the highest prevalence of stunting [24], and this prevalence is even higher in the Central Highlands regions of Madagascar, reaching over 60% [23]. Relatively little is known about the distribution of intestinal parasites in stunted children originating from Antananarivo, Madagascar.

Several microscopy-based techniques are available and widely used for the identification of IPIs. The Kato-Katz (KK) thick smear technique, originally developed for the diagnosis of schistosomiasis [25], is currently the most widely used microscopic technique and is considered the gold standard by the World Health Organization (WHO) for assessing both the prevalence and intensity of infection in helminth control programs [26]. A major drawback of the KK technique is that multiple samples with multiple slides per sample are required to be examined over several days to reach high levels of sensitivity and quantitative accuracy, especially in light infections [27]. Moreover, this technique cannot detect protozoan which need to be diagnosed using fecal concentration and fecal smears. However, microscopy-based methods also have limitations with regard to poor sensitivity and the inability to differentiate protozoan parasite stages to the species level [28]. For E. histolytica suboptimal sensitivity of the microscopy-based techniques which is about 60%, [29] and the inability to distinguish potentially pathogenic E. histolytica from morphologically identical but nonpathogenic Entamoeba dispar, Entamoeba moshkovskii, and other quadrinucleate cysts of Entamoeba has been demonstrated [29].

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques are key in modern diagnostic microbiology. For both STH and protozoan infestation, PCR has been shown to be more sensitive than microscopy-based techniques [26,30,31]. In addition, such assays can be adapted to be quantitative PCR, which is a significant advantage in STH infections, where parasite burden, rather than the presence or absence of infection, is a key determinant of morbidity. The aim of this work was to investigate possible associations between IPI and stunting status and to determine risk factors of carriage of intestinal parasites among children. Also, the study attempted to compare the sensitivity of microscopy and real-time PCR-based techniques.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

This study is a nested study to the Afribiota project [32]. The protocol of the Afribiota project [32] was approved by the National Biomedical Research Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Public Health of Madagascar (104-MSANP/CE, September 12, 2016). Parents or children’s guardians received oral and written information about the Afribiota study and signed a letter of consent before children included in the study. AFRIBIOTA is a case-control study on stunted children in Antananarivo, Madagascar and in Bangui, Central African Republic carried out from December 13th, 2016 to March 20th, 2018 [32]. The main objective of AFRIBIOTA was to describe the intestinal dysbiosis observed in the context of stunting and to link it to pediatric environmental enteropathy (PEE), a chronic inflammation of the small intestine. Individuals who were found to be infested by parasites were offered treatment (albendazole) following standard clinical practice. Samples were coded for further data analysis.

General study design/Recruitment

The general study design, recruitment procedures and inclusion and exclusion criteria of the Afribiota project were previously described [32]. Briefly, in each country, 460 children aged 2–5 years with no overt signs of gastrointestinal disease were recruited (260 with no growth delay, 100 moderately stunted (MS) and 100 severely stunted (SS)) [32]. All children recruited in Madagascar and meeting the inclusion criteria for Afribiota were included in the present study. Children were divided into three different categories: SS, MS and nonstunted (NS). Severe stunting was defined as a height-for-age z-score ≤ -3 Standard deviation (SD), and moderate stunting was defined as a height-for-age z-score between -3 SD and -2 SD of the median height of the WHO reference population [33,34]. Control children were children without stunting (height-for-age z-score > 2SD). Stunted and control children were matched according to age (+/- 3 months), gender and neighborhood (same neighborhood or adjacent neighborhood as based on the official maps distributed by the Ministry) and season of inclusion (dry or wet season). Recruitment was performed in the community (90%) and in hospitals (10%). Community recruitment was performed in Ankasina and Andranomanalina Isotry, two of the poorest neighborhoods of Antananarivo, as well as their surrounding neighborhoods. In hospital recruitment, children who were seeking care in the Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Mère Enfant de Tsaralalàna (CHUMET) or in the Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Joseph Ravoahangy Andrianavalona (CHU-JRA) and in the Centre de Santé Maternelle et Infantile de Tsaralalana (CSMI) and who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were also invited to participate in the study (hospital-recruited children).

Data and sample collection

Based on the possible risk factors for stunting and PEE, a questionnaire was developed for the Afribiota project and tested on a pre-study including 15 subjects in the same study area. A subset of variables from the questionnaire was used for this study. The metadata assessed included demographic information (gender, age, weight, height) and lifestyle practices associated with parasite infestation (hands washing habit, mother’s level education, family marital status, mother’s employment, father’s employment, drinking water, exposure to sewage and garbage, location of the kitchen area (inside house or outside house), latrines, soil type and community setting). All data was collected on paper questionnaires and transferred in double to a Microsoft Access database.

After proper instruction, mothers/caretakers were given a clean plastic glove and screw-top plastic jar to collect stool samples at home, and samples were aliquoted as soon as they were brought to the hospital. An aliquot of the stool was placed in a cryotube and directly stored in liquid nitrogen until it was sent to the Institut Pasteur of Madagascar (IPM), where it was frozen without fixatives at −80°C until DNA extraction was performed. Another aliquot was placed in a tube containing merthiolate-iodine-formaldehyde (MIF) solution and the rest of the stool in the pot was kept at 4°C until further analysis. Microscopic and real-time PCR analyses were performed at IPM as described below.

Microscopic analyses

All fecal samples were examined microscopically using the MIF and KK techniques for the detection of intestinal parasite infestations (IPIs).

For the merthiolate-Iodine-formaldehyde (MIF) technique, stool samples were collected in merthiolate-iodine-formaldehyde solution, as described by SAPERO JJ [35]. At IPM, stool samples were mixed carefully with a wooden stick, incubated for 30–60 min and then examined under a light microscope to detect IPIs.

For the KK technique, KK thick smears were prepared as described by WHO [36] on microscope slides using a square template with a hole diameter of 6 mm and depth of 1.5 mm, which is sufficient to sample 41.7 mg of feces. All samples were examined within 30–60 min to determine the presence of STH eggs. The number of helminth eggs was counted on a per species basis and multiplied by 24 to obtain the fecal egg counts (FEC) in units of eggs per gram of stool (EPG).

Microsporidia and coccidians cannot be detected by any of the microscopic techniques used on the samples and were therefore not included in the analysis on diagnostic accuracy.

Molecular analysis

Molecular diagnosis was performed for the following parasites: A. lumbricoides, G. intestinalis, E. histolytica, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Isospora belli, and the microsporidia species Enterocytozoon bieneusi and Encephalitozoon spp. We used parasite-specific primers and probes (Taqman) from published studies with some modifications to fluorochromes. The respective primers and their references are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Real-time PCR set up overview.

Target Oligonucletide sequence 5’-3’ Product size Gene Target Genbank Accession References
Ascaris lumbricoides Fv: GTAATAGCAGTCGGCGGTTTCTT 108 ITS1 AB571301.1 [37]
Rv: GCCCAACATGCCACCTATTC
Pb: FAM-TTGGCGGACAATTGCATGCGAT-MBG
Giardia intestinalis Fv: GACGGCTCAGGACAACGGTT 63 SSUrRNA M54878 [38]
Rv: TTGCCAGCGGTGTCCG
Pb: FAM-CCCGCGGCGGTCCCTGCTAG- BHQ1
Entamoeba histolytica Fv: ATTGTCGTGGCATCCTAACTCA 173 SSUrRNA X64142 [38]
Rv: GCGGACGGCTCATTATAACA
Pb: HEX-TCATTGAATGAATTGGCCATTT-BHQ1
Cryptosporidium parvum Fv: CGCTTCTCTAGCCTTTCATGA 138 138bp of specific sequence of C. parvum AF188110 [38]
Rv: CTTCACGTGTGTTTGCCAAT
Pb: ROX-CCAATCACAGAATCATCAGAATCGACTGGTATC-BHQ2
Isospora belli Fw: ATATTCCCTGCAGCATGTCTGTTT 108 ITS2 AF443614 [39]
Rv: CCACACGCGTATTCCAGAGA
Pb: FAM-5CAAGTTCTGCTCACGCGCTTCTGG-BHC1
Enterocytozoon bieneusi Fv: TGTGTAGGCGTGAGAGTGTATCTG 109 ITS AF101198 [40]
Rv: CATCCAACCATCACGTACCAATC
Pb: FAM-CACTGCACCCACATCCCTCACCCTT-BHQ1
Encephalitozoon spp. Fv: CACCAGGTTGATTCTGCCTGAC 227 SSU rRNA U09929 [40]
Rv: CTAGTTAGGCCATTACCCTAACTACCA
Pb: JOE-CTATCACTGAGCCGTCC-BHQ1

Fv: Forward; Rv: Reverse; Pb: Probe

DNA extraction

Stool samples were removed from -80°C and allowed to thaw, and DNA was extracted using a commercial kit (Cador Pathogen 96 QIAcube HT Kit, QIAGEN France, Courtaboeuf, France) according to the manufacturer’s instructions with an initial additional step of bead beating to increase mechanical disruption of cysts, oocysts, spores and eggs of parasites. Briefly, 200 mg of stool was introduced into a pathogen lysis tube with size S beads (4 μm), and 1.4 ml of ASL buffer was added. The tube was then placed in a TissueLyser (QIAGEN Retsch GmbH, Germany) and shaken for 10 min at 30 hertz to break the parasitic walls. Afterward, the suspension was incubated in a dry bath at 95°C for 5 min followed by centrifugation for 1 min at 10706 g. Then, 1.2 ml of supernatant was introduced into a tube containing an InhibitEx tablet and centrifuged for 3 min. Two hundred microliters of supernatant was transferred into a 1.5-ml tube containing proteinase K (supplied with the Cador Pathogen 96 QIAcube HT Kit), and 200 μl of AL buffer and 200 μl of pure ethanol (100%) were added to the tube and mixed. Finally, after incubation at 70°C, 400 μl of the solution was pipetted and placed in a 96-well deep well plate, and extraction was performed using the automatic extractor QIAcube HT 96 (QIAGEN France, Courtaboeuf, France). In this instance, the samples were stored at -20°C until quantification of parasite DNA loads by real-time PCR.

Real-time PCR

Real-time PCR was carried out on a CFX 96 Real Time system (BIO-RAD, France) in a final volume of 10 μl containing 2 μl of 5X HOT FIREPol Probe qPCR Mix Plus (Solis BioDyne OÜ, Estonia), 0.4 μl (400 nM) of each primer, 0.6 μl (250 nM) of TAQMAN probe, 2.6 μl of water HPLC (Sigma, Germany) and 4 μl of DNA template. Amplification generally comprised 15” at 95°C followed by 45 cycles of 20’ at 95°C for denaturation and 60°C at 60’ for annealing and elongation. All real-time PCR assays were performed in simplex (separate reactions) format instead of a multiplex format.

For the positive controls, synthetic vectors were generated. Each synthetic DNA (n = 3) containing the target nucleotide sequences was introduced into a pUC57 plasmid by GeneCust (GeneCust, Dudelange, Luxembourg). TOP10 competent Escherichia coli DH5α (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY) were transformed with the individual plasmids (PUC57), and the plasmids were purified by using the QIAprep Spin Miniprep Kit (QIAGEN, France) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The purified plasmid DNA was quantified by using a Nanodrop-2000 Spectrophotometer (NanoDrop Technologies, Thermo Fisher, USA), and the purity of DNA was measured and found to be satisfactory with an A260/A280 ratio within the range of 1.7–2.0 in all DNA samples. Plasmids were run on 3% agarose gels to verify the expected size of each target sequence. Then, the plasmids were diluted 8-fold, and the standards served as positive controls to ensure amplification. Wells with distilled water template were used as the negative controls.

Statistical analyses

The statistical analysis was performed with R 3.6.2. The significance level was fixed for all analyses at 0.05. Factors potentially associated with infestations in univariate analysis with p-values of <0.25 were included in a backward logistic regression. Comparisons of microscopy with real-time PCR results were analyzed by using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. The degree of agreement between diagnostic techniques was assessed with the kappa coefficient. Prevalence was calculated based on the following positivity values: a sample was considered positive if the respective parasite was identified either in real-time PCR (cycle threshold values were below 45) or if it showed egg, cysts, or vegetative form by microscopy. A sample was considered negative if the sample was also negative in real-time PCR as in any of the microscopy techniques. Sensitivity was calculated by classifying stool samples as positive by real-time PCR when cycle threshold values were below 45 and as positive by microscopy if an egg, cysts, and a vegetative form were seen on any of the techniques. Figures were visualized using the ggplots2 package and Excel software.

Results

General characteristics of the study group

A total of 460 children aged 2 to 5 were enrolled from December 13, 2016 to March 20, 2018. Parasitological data were available for 410 children (81 SS, 90 MS and 239 NS) who were included in the present study (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Flow chart of children recruitments.

Fig 1

Subjects for which feces or other data (e.g. sex, age…) were not available were excluded from the study.

Children consisted of 184 (44.9%) males and 226 (55.1%) females. Most of the children (54.9%, n = 225) were between 4 and 5 years of age, and the rest (45.1%, n = 185) were between 2 and 3 years old. Among these children, 58.3% (n = 239) were nonstunted, and 41.7% (n = 171) were stunted (HAZ<2 SD). A total of 54.4% (n = 223) of the children originated from Ankasina, and 45.6% (n = 187) originated from Andranomanalina Isotry.

Infestation prevalence

By combining microscopy analyses and real-time PCR, of the 410 children included, 96.3% (n = 395) were infested by at least one species of intestinal parasites. Males and females were equally at risk of parasitic infestation (96.7% and 96.0%, p = 0.90). There were no significant relationships between intestinal parasitic infestation and the community setting of the children (95.5% and 97.3%, respectively, Ankasina and Andranomanalina Isotry, p>0.05). The prevalence of IPIs was further analyzed according to age categories. All age groups were affected by IPIs, but the prevalence of infestation was significantly (P = 0.04) higher among children between 4 and 5 years of age (53.9%, n = 221) compared to children aged 2 to 3 years (44.9%, n = 184). During the study period, the prevalence of infestation was high for all months (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Monthly prevalence of intestinal parasitic infestations: at least one parasite during the study period (from December 2016 to March 2018).

Fig 2

Children were equally infested by intestinal protozoa (88.5%, n = 363) and helminths (88.3%, n = 362). Overall, 16 different species of IPIs were detected. The predominant IPIs were G. intestinalis (79.5%, n = 326), A. lumbricoides (68.3%, n = 280) and T. trichiura (68.0%, n = 279). E. bieneusi was found in 136 children (33.1%) and constituted the predominant microsporidia species. This species were found significantly more often in Andranomanalina Isotry compared to Ankasina (p = 0.02). Table 2 shows the prevalence of all detected IPIs, their frequencies in stunted and nonstunted children and their frequencies in each of the two community settings.

Table 2. Prevalence of IPIs in 410 individuals with different diagnostic techniques.

Nutritional status Neighborhoods
Diagnostic techniques N % SS (%) MS (%) NS (%) Pa Ankasina (%) Isotry (%) Pa
Helminths
Ascaris lumbricoides Microscopy, RT-PCR 280 68.3 61 (14.9) 59 (14.4) 160(39.0) 0.30 145 (35.4) 135 (32.9) 0.14
Trichuris trichiura Microscopy 279 68.0 59 (14.4) 65 (15.9) 155 (37.8) 0.25 146 (35.6) 133 (32.4) 0.26
Enterobius vermicularis Microscopy 3 0.7 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.5) 0.77 3 (0.7) 0 (0.0) 0.25
Ancylostoma spp. Microscopy 1 0.2 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 1.00 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 1.00
Hymenolepis nana Microscopy 5 1.2 1 (0.2) 1 (0.2) 3 (0.7) 1.00 3 (0.7) 2 (0.5) 1.00
Pathogenic protozoa
Giardia intestinalis Microscopy, RT-PCR 326 79.5 61 (14.9) 72 (17.6) 193 (47.1) 0.57 179 (43.7) 147 (35.9) 077
Entamoeba histolyticab RT-PCR 65 15.8 14 (3.4) 22 (5.4) 29 (7.1) 0.02 37 (9.0) 28 (6.8) 0.75
Cryptosporidium parvum RT-PCR 79 19.3 16 (3.9) 16 (3.9) 47 (11.5) 0.92 40 (9.8) 39 (9.5) 0.53
Isospora belli RT-PCR 87 21.2 21 (5.1) 16 (3.9) 50 (12.2) 0.42 43 (10.5) 44 (10.7) 0.35
Enterocytozoon bieneusi RT-PCR 136 33.2 31 (7.6) 35 (8.5) 70 (17.1) 0.14 63 (15.4) 73 (17.8) 0.02
Encephalitozoon spp. RT-PCR 63 15.4 16 (3.9) 17 (4.1) 30 (7.3) 0.17 36 (8.8) 27 (6.6) 0.73
Nonpathogenic protozoa
Entamoeba coli Microscopy 41 10.0 9 (2.2) 10 (2.4) 22 (5.4) 0.81 23 (0.2) 18 (0.0) 0.94
Endolimax nana Microscopy 10 2.4 2 (0.5) 3 (0.7) 5 (1.2) 0.82 6 (1.5) 4 (1.0) 0.76
Entamoeba hartmanni Microscopy 12 2.9 4 (1.0) 2 (0.5) 6 (1.5) 0.43 7 (1.7) 5 (1.2) 1.00
Chilomastix mesnili Microscopy 3 0.7 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 2 (0.5) 1.00 1 (0.2) 2 (0.5) 0.59
Blastocystis sp. Microscopy 51 12.4 7 (1.7) 11 (2.7) 33 (8.0) 0.47 26 (6.3) 25 (6.1) 0.70

RT-PCR, Real-time PCR; SS, Severe stunted; MS, Moderate stunted; NS, Nonstunted; % percentage; P: p-value

a Derived from Pearson’s χ2-test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate.

b Microscopy is not able to differentiate between E. histolytica and the nonpathogenic E. dispar, E. moskowki or E. Bangladeshi [41]. Thereby in this study, only prevalence rate of E. histolytica detected by RT-PCR was considered.

Regarding nutritional status and infestation, all children were equally likely to show a parasitic infestation except E. histolytica, which found significantly associated between stunted and nonstunted children (p = 0.02) Table 2.

Polyparasitism

Polyparasitism was more common (91.5%, n = 375) than monoparasitism (4.9%, n = 20). Infestations with the three parasites G. intestinalis, T. trichiura and A. lumbricoides was diagnosed in 40 severely stunted (9.8%), 38 moderately stunted (9.3%) and in 96 nonstunted children (23.4%). Table 3 summarizes the occurrence of polyparasitism in stunted and nonstunted children. All children, regardless of their nutritional status, were equally likely to display polyparasitism.

Table 3. Nutritional status and most predominant polyparasitism.

Polyparasitism Nutritional status pa
SS(%) MS(%) NS(%)
Giardia intestinalis, Trichuris trichiura and Ascaris lumbricoides 40(9.8) 38(9.3) 96(23.4) 0.34
Ascaris lumbricoides and Giardia intestinalis 10(2.4) 15(3.7) 46(11.2) 0.35
Trichuris trichiura and Giardia intestinalis 8(2.0) 17(4.1) 33(8.0) 0.23
Ascaris lumbricoides and Trichuris trichiura 7(1.7) 8(2.0) 19(4.6) 0.95

a Derived from Pearson’s χ2-test only

SS, Severe stunted; MS, Moderate stunted; NS, Nonstunted; %: percentage; P: p-value

Potential risk factors associated with intestinal parasitic infestations

Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that children in the age group of 4 to 5 years old were more likely to be diagnosed with intestinal parasites (Adjusted odd ratio (AOR) = 4.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), (1.35–15.77), p-value = 0.015) compared with children in the age group of 2 to 3 years old, and children with mothers with low educational levels were more likely to be diagnosed with intestinal parasite infections (primary and secondary, AOR = 12.59; 95% CI, (2.76–57.47), p-value = 0.001; AOR = 9.17; 95% CI, (2.12–39.71), p-value = 0.003, respectively) than children with mothers with high school education levels and above (Table 4).

Table 4. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of potential risk factors associated with parasitic infestation among children.

Table showed only factors which found associated with IPIs.

Parasitic infestations
Risk factors Positive (%) Negative (%) Total N = 410 (%) Crude OR (CI95%) Adjusted OR (CI 95%) # P-values
Age (years)
[2–3] 174 (42.5) 11 (2.7) 185 (45.1) -
[4–5] 220 (53.8) 4 (1.0) 224 (54.4) 3.45 (1.08–11.02) 4.61 (1.35–15.77) 0.015*
Mother’s level education
High school and above 10 (2.5) 2 (0.5) 12 (2.9) - - -
None 196 (48.5) 4 (1.0) 200 (48.7) 1 (0.15–6.41) 1 (0.14–6.95) 1
Primary 163 (40.3) 5 (1.2) 168 (40.9) 9.85 (2.29–42.42) 12.59 (2.76–57.47) 0.001*
Secondary 20 (5.0) 4 (1.0) 24 (5.8) 6.52 (1.62–26.29) 9.17 (2.12–39.71) 0.003*

Note

* = p<0.05

%: percentage; OR: Odd Ratio

Further analyses of the data (S1 Data) revealed that intestinal parasitic infestation was not dependent on gender (p = 0.91), garbage treatment method (burn or throw, p = 0.47), waste water disposal (inside concession or outside concession, p = 0.57), location of the kitchen in relation to the house (inside house or outside house, p = 0.38), type of floor in the house (cemented or noncemented, p = 0.97), community setting (Ankasina or Andranomanalina Isotry) (p = 0.48), hand washing habit (p = 0.82) or type of drinking water (treated or not treated, p = 0.24). Additionally, no significant associations were observed between children living in close proximity to a landfill or not (p = 0.76), toilet facilities (individual, collective or no latrine, p = 0.83) or nutritional status (malnourished and control, p = 0.61).

Potential risk factors associated with the carriage of specific parasites

Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that drinking untreated water was a risk factor for infestation with G. intestinalis (AOR = 1.85; 95% CI, (1.1–3.09), p = 0.019) and E. histolytica (AOR = 1.9; 95% CI, (1.07–3.38), p = 0.028). Further, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed association between E. histolytica infestation and moderately stunted children (AOR = 0.37; 95% CI, (0.2–0.71), p = 0.002). In addition, living in a house with noncemented floor as compared to a cemented floor (AOR = 1.85; 95% CI, (1.18–2.09), p = 0.008) and older age (children from 4 to 5 years old compared to children aged 2–3 years old (AOR = 3.2; 95% CI, (2.04–5.01), p = 0.001)) was associated with T. trichiura infestation (Table 5).

Table 5. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of potential risk factors associated with pathogens parasites*.

Dependent variables Giardia intestinalis Crude OR (CI 95%) Adjusted OR (CI 95%) p-values
Positive No (%) Negative No (%)
Drinking water
Treated 78 (19.0) 31 (7.6) - -
Not treated 248 (60.5) 53 (12.9) 1.85 (1.11–3.08) 1.85 (1.1–3.09) 0.019
Entamoeba histolytica
Positive No (%) Negative No (%)
Drinking water
Treated 24(5.9) 85(20.7) - -
Not treated 41 (10.0) 260(63.4) 1.81 (1.03–3.17) 1.9 (1.07–3.38) 0.028
Nutritional status
Nonstunted 29 (7.1) 210 (51.2) -
Moderately stunted 22 (5.4) 68 (16.6) 0.41 (0.22–0.76) 0.37 (0.2–0.71) 0.002
Severely stunted 14 (3.4) 67 (16.3) 0.65 (0.33–1.31) 0.59 (0.29–1.19) 0.142
Trichuris trichiura
Positive No (%) Negative No (%)
Age (years)
[23] 102 (24.9) 83 (20.3) - -
[45] 176 (43.0) 48 (11.7) 2.94 (1.9–4.53) 3.2 (2.04–5.01) 0.001
Soil type
Cemented 89 (21.8) 60 (14.7) - -
No cemented 189 (46.2) 71 (17.4) 1.84 (1.2–2.83) 1.85 (1.18–2.9) 0.008

* The table shows only those pathogens that have been found to be associated with risk factors.

N°: Number; %: percentage, OR: Odd ratio; CI: Confidence interval

Diagnostic performance of real-time PCR versus microscopy

A comparison of the prevalence of parasite infestation between real-time PCR and microscopy was made individually for G. intestinalis, E. histolytica and A. lumbricoides (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Comparison of the prevalence of three parasites determined by real-time PCR and microscopy techniques.

Fig 3

Blue bar indicates species determined by real-time PCR and red bar, species determined by microscopic techniques.

Real-time PCR was significantly more sensitive than stool microscopy in identifying G. intestinalis (58.5% versus 2.0%, P < 0.05), E. histolytica (13.9% versus 0.0%, P < 0.05), and A. lumbricoides (17.8% versus 4.4%, P < 0.05). An important difference was noted between real-time PCR and microscopy for G. intestinalis and E. histolytica with a sensitivity of 90.0% and 91.3% negative predictive value (NPV) for G. intestinalis and a sensitivity of 61% and 98.5% NPV for E. histolytica. Fig 4A–4C show that for each parasite species, real-time PCR-positive but microscopy-negative samples had significantly lower target DNA loads (i.e., higher Ct values) than real-time PCR-positive samples that were also microscopy-positive.

Fig 4. Microscopy versus real-time PCR positive results for G. intestinalis, A. lumbricoides and E. histolytica.

Fig 4

Boxplot for A), G. intestinalis, for B) E. histolytica and for C) A. lumbricoides. X axis of all boxplot indicated microscopy result of which sign “-”means negative result and sign “+” positive result and Y axis indicate Ct value of the real time PCR.

However, samples that were positive by microscopy but negative by real-time PCR were also detected (G. intestinalis 8 and A. lumbricoides 18).

Direct comparisons between microscopy and real-time PCR for A. lumbricoides, G. intestinalis and E. histolytica were undertaken using Kappa agreement statistics (Table 6). The results show moderate agreement for A. lumbricoides and poor agreement for G. intestinalis and E. histolytica.

Table 6. Parasite prevalence estimated by real-time PCR and microscopy, and Kappa agreement.

Real-time PCR Microscopy Kappa*
POS NEG Total agreement (%)
Ascaris lumbricoides POS 190 73 319 (77.8) 0.55
NEG 18 129
Giardia intestinalis POS 78 240 162 (39.5) 0.08
NEG 8 84
Entamoeba histolyticaa POS 8 57 357 (86.1) 0.19
NEG 0 345

* Kappa Agreement Level: K <0.20 Poor; 0.21–0.40 Fair; 0.41–0.60 Moderate; 0.61–0.80 Good; 0.81–1.00 Very Good

POS: Positive; NEG: Negative; %: percentage

a because microscopy is not able to differentiate between E. histolytica and the nonpathogenic E. dispar, E. moskowki or E. Bangladeshi [41], only microscopy positives results with real-time PCR positives were considered

Quantification

Since one of the benefits of KK is that it provides a quantitative assessment of the STH burden, we compared the quantitative output of KK and real-time PCR results from the same stool samples. Although many A. lumbricoides infections are missed by KK (Fig 5), there was a correlation between the EPG count measured by KK and the Ct values measured by real-time PCR (r = 0.13, p = 0.013). From Fig 5, we noted that the majority of A. lumbricoides infestations overlooked by KK had Ct values above 28. KK can more reliably detect heavy infections than moderate- to low-intensity infestations.

Fig 5. Relationship between real-time PCR and microscopy (Kato-Katz thick smear technique: KK) results for Ascaris lumbricoides.

Fig 5

The figure displays the A. lumbricoides Ct values obtained by real-time PCR as a function of the mean of number of eggs/gram (EPG) measured by KK from the same stool.

Discussion

In this study, we investigated the presence of intestinal parasites (both helminths and protozoans) among stunted and nonstunted children less than 5 years old living in two disadvantaged community settings in Antananarivo, Madagascar. IPIs remain a major public health problem among the Malagasy population, where poor environmental and sanitation, improper hygiene, overcrowding, low education attainment and poverty are common. Given the adverse living conditions in the studied areas, the findings showed a high prevalence of IPIs, with 96.3% of all participants (including nonstunted children) being infested with at least one parasitic species. Children living in these two neighborhoods (Ankasina and Andranomanalina Isotry) were equally likely to have a parasitic infestation. STHs and protozoans in both areas were overwhelmingly. Several previous studies have already shown the high prevalence of parasitic infestations in Madagascar in both children with acute diarrhea and healthy children from different community settings [42,43]. Some of these studies showed particularly high infestation rates of helminths in remote rural villages, with prevalences of 74.7% and 71.4% being observed for T. trichiura and A. lumbricoides, respectively [14], although helminth infestations are rare in other places, such as the city of Mahajunga (≤3%), where protozoans are dominant (such as Blastocystis sp. 69.8%) [44].The majority of intestinal parasites, mostly intestinal helminths, are acquired via fecal-oral transmission. The fact that an important proportion of the subjects use collective latrines vs using individual latrines and live close proximity landfill vs living far away have no access to sanitary infrastructures and do not adopt proper hygiene rules may explain this result. However, the prevalence of protozoa, such as G. intestinalis was considerably higher than that found in other studies [44,45] conducted in Madagascar, where the authors found prevalence of 24.4% and 16.4% respectively. The majority of the studies conducted in Madagascar were carried out in the western region and prevalence of G. intestinalis varied between villages. For example, an epidemiological study of the etiology of infant diarrheal disease conducted in 2008–2009 in 14 districts in Madagascar showed 26.2%, 20.2% and 18.1% in Maevatanana, Morondava and Majunga, respectively in the western region [42].

The difference in prevalence compared to our study may be due to the methods used rather than the study area: previous studies performed in Madagascar only used microscopy mainly the MIF technique to detect G. intestinalis while we used both, microscopy and real-time PCR, which has a much higher sensitivity. This is exemplified through the fact that the prevalence of G. intestinalis in our study was 21% when using the MIF technique, which is almost identical to the prevalences, reported in other regions of the country while it was 78% by the real-time PCR.

The prevalence of Entamoeba coli (E. coli) in the current study was 10.0%. Although E. coli and other nonpathogenic parasites detected in this study do not cause disease, their presence indicates fecal-oral, mostly waterborne transmission in the host, which is an indicator for the general assessment of the hygiene status of the area [46].

The focus of this study was to determine the prevalence of IPIs in stunted and control (nonstunted) children. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on prevalence and risk factor analysis of intestinal parasite infestations among malnourished children in Antananarivo the capital of Madagascar. Although our data showed a high prevalence of IPI in both types of children, an association was found between E. histolytica and stunting especially with moderately stunted children (Table 5). This finding is supported by other studies that suggested a negative association between E. histolytica and child growth although these studies did not differentiated stunted children in moderately stunted and severely stunted [47,48]. E. histolytica can cause anorexia due to bloating and apathy, which leads to reduced dietary intake. This can have a long-term effect on a child’s linear growth [49].

Both of our two study areas are characterized by extreme poverty and unhygienic conditions, which could explain the high infestation in stunted and nonstunted children. There has been a global effort to treat and prevent these infestations through the deployment of mass drug administration/preventive chemotherapy (MDA/PC) campaigns in Madagascar [23]. The WHO recommends biannual MDA/PC for STH infestations in preschool, school-aged children, pregnant women, and adults who are constantly exposed to STH. However, WHO recommendations do not reach all areas of Madagascar [50]. Additionally, it is important to note that while a single dose of mebendazole or albendazole may be sufficient for treating ascariasis and hookworm infestations, effective trichuriasis treatment requires three doses of anthelmintic medication; conversely, both albendazole and mebendazole can be coadministered with other deworming drugs, such as ivermectin, to improve efficacy against T. trichiura [51]. Future mass deworming actions should be implemented in the studied areas and other disadvantaged neighborhoods of Madagascar cities based on surveillance results (i.e., adaptation of the posology for T. trichiura and frequency of MDA) to reduce this high burden of parasitic infections and thus the risk of morbidity and should be complemented by interventions focusing on WASH [52].

In this study, several possible determinants associated with IPIs were investigated, and a significant association was found between IPIs and children aged between 4 and 5 years and low educational level of mothers (primary and secondary respectively). It is known that there is a strong relationship between a child’s health and the parent’s education, specifically the mother’s education [53]. While several studies in other countries have shown that an especially low maternal education level is highly correlated with the risk of parasitic infection in children [54,55], another study in Turkey did not show any significant association between intestinal parasites and maternal education [56]. Our finding might be due to the low level of education and limited knowledge of the mother about the controllability of parasitic infestations and regarding the life cycle and infestation routes of parasites. This study identified that children belonging to the age group of 4 to 5 years were approximately four times more at risk of being infested with IPIs compared to children between 2 and 3 years of age. Although our findings are similar to those of Forson et al. [57], this result might be observed because children especially of this age, play and eat very close to the mud and stagnant water where the feces cleaned out of the latrines are thrown without supervision of parents [58]. The other possible reason is that at this age, children start to explore further away from home, being hence more exposed to dirty environments and sanitary conditions. Further analyses of the data showed no association between household hygiene and parasite infestation (p>0.05). Furthermore, no significant associations were observed between infestation and children living close proximity to a landfill or toilet facilities (individual, collective or no latrine). Additionally, our study showed that the presence of parasitic infestation was not significantly associated with nutritional status.

G. intestinalis was the most common parasite identified in this study. The present finding showed a significant association between G. intestinalis prevalence and untreated water which is similar to the results obtained by Osten et al. in Manisa, Turkey [59] and Muadica et al. in central Mozambique [60]. In a study carried out in Argentina, it was determined that intestinal parasite frequencies detected in various sociocultural areas were related to contaminated water resources by the parasites, as well as insufficient health conditions [61]. The study of Muadica et al. showed that drinking river/stream as a primary or secondary source of water was identified as a risk association for G. intestinalis and water chlorination/ boiling reduced the odds of this species in children. The source of drinking water is an important risk factor for infestation with intestinal protozoa such that waterborne transmission of all detected protozoa in this study is possible. Moreover, E. histolytica, a waterborne species such as G. intestinalis, was statistically significantly associated with untreated water (Table 5) in this study. This shows the importance of source and quality of water as factor of transmission of infectious pathogens. Indeed, during the present study, sewage and toilet wastewater were often found freely flowing to the water sources (e.g., wells), which is a concern for possible waterborne parasites transmission like G. intestinalis and E. histolytica infestation [58].

In this study, noncemented soil and 4- to 5-year-old children were found to be associated with the probability of having T. trichiura infestation. It is known that STH is transmitted to humans by fecally contaminated soil and T. trichiura infestation, as all STHs are related to environmental conditions [62]. In the study area, human feces were found near houses where children play and eat without parental supervision, which could explain this association [58].

Diagnostic tools are crucial for mapping the presence of intestinal parasite infections in a country. In this study, in addition to investigating the prevalence infection levels of intestinal parasites among stunted and nonstunted children, we also aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of microscopic techniques to determine A. lumbricoides, G. intestinalis and E. histolytica and the diagnostic accuracy by real-time PCR. A large disparity in the prevalence rates between techniques was noted for the detection of these parasites when compared on a per sample basis. Real-time PCR in particular detected a large number of positive samples not detected by microscopy. The small number of samples detected positive by microscopy but negative by real-time PCR may be due to variations in the dispersion of eggs and cysts within the subsamples taken, due to the heterogeneous nature of the stool, as well as the nonuniform nature of their excretion in stool causing variation in both techniques [6365]. The presence of microscopy-positive, PCR negative samples could also be due to potential presence of PCR inhibitors in the extracted and purified genomic DNA [66]. Differences between techniques may also be due to errors leading to false positive results. Such errors are less likely in real-time PCR due to rigorous controls, while limited controls can be implemented with microscopy, which relies heavily on the technical expertise of the user [67].

Moreover, false negatives from microscopic techniques (KK and MIFs) result mostly from low rates of detection at low infection intensities. It is possible that real-time PCR could also identify DNA shed from worms (dead cells released by worms) not producing eggs in the intestines. Furthermore, our data suggest that real-time PCR could be considered the “new gold standard,” to which microscopic techniques should be compared.

However, one of the strengths of KK is that it provides a quantitative measure of infestation burden. We have shown that KK and real-time PCR measures are inversely correlated for A. lumbricoides (r = 0.13, p = 0.0131), suggesting that DNA concentrations calculated against a standard curve for real-time PCR can be used as a quantitative measure of infection intensity. EPG is used as a proxy for worm burden and hence as an assessment of transmission potential in defined populations. We have shown that EPG and DNA concentrations are equally good predictors of worm burden with correlation coefficients.

There are limitations to this study. Because stunting is a chronic syndrome [68], a longitudinal, rather than case-control, design would have allowed us to investigate a causal association between parasite infestations and nutritional status among the children. Additionally, in this study, one stool sample by individual was analyzed, although the sensitivity of microscopy technique is normally increased by analyzing multiple samples from a single or, ideally, from multiple stool samples for parasite detection. Furthermore, in this study, no attempts were conducted to genotype samples with a positive result to G. intestinalis, C. parvum and E. bieneusi. Although this was not the primary goal of the survey, unravelling the genetic diversity of these pathogens is a task that should be conducted in future studies.

Despite these limitations, one of the strengths of this study is the combination of real-time PCR and microscopy to assess the prevalence of IPIs, unlike most studies carried out in Madagascar, where only microscopy was used. The use of PCR in addition to microscopy made it possible to better assess the prevalence of IPIs due to its high sensitivity and allowed the detection of certain parasites (C. parvum, I. belli, E. bieneusi and Encephalitozoon. spp.) whose microscopy alone would be unable to detect.

Conclusions

We demonstrate that intestinal helminthic and protozoan infections are widespread in Ankasina and Andranomanalina Isotry, two disadvantaged neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar. Children living in these areas, regardless of their nutritional status, are equally able to acquire a parasitic infestation as a consequence of the poor environmental and sanitation of the studied areas. By combining microscopy and real-time PCR, the dominant parasite was G. intestinalis followed by A. lumbricoides and T. trichiura. Among the different potential risk factors assessed, only age, drinking water, soil type being moderately stunted and education level of the mother showed a significant association with infestation. Therefore, awareness about the control of intestinal parasitic infestation, personal and environmental hygiene, and information about how to prevent IPIs should be provided to parents.

Supporting information

S1 Data. Supporting data.

As: Ascaris lumbricoides. T.t: Trichuris trichiura. E.v: Enterobius vermicularis. H.n: Hymenolepis nana. Ank: Ancylostoma spp. E.c: Entamoeba coli. E.n: Endolimax nana. E.ha: Entamoeba hartmanni. G.i: Giardia intestinalis. B.sp: Blastocystis sp. Eh/d: Entamoeba histolytica/dispar. Cm: Chilomastix mesnilii. Cp: Cryptosporidium parvum. Ib: Isospora belli. Eb: Enterocytozon bieneusi. Espp: Encephalitozoon spp. KK: kato-katz. N.O: No Observation, stool not sufficient for the technique. The numbers on the KK results are the number of eggs observed per gram of stool. In the column of MIF: sign+: low parasite load sign++: average parasite load sign+++: high parasite load. In the columns of Micro_As, Micro_Gi and Micro_Eh: sign+: mean positif result sign-: mean negative result. Polyparasitism column: faible: low moyen: medium forte: high zero: no polyparasitism. In all columns with 1 and 0: 1: positive result 0: negative result. In the column of statut_nut: NN: nonstunted children (control). MCM: Moderately stunted children. MCS: severely stunted children. In Tt column: 10000: High load 1000: medium load 100: low load 0: negative result. In As_kk column: 10000: High load 1000: medium load 100: low load 0: negative result.

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all participating families, the AFRIBIOTA Consortium, including all field workers Tseheno Harisoa, and Rado Andrianantenaina as well as laboratory engineers, technicians, administrative support persons, doctors and nurses, the participating hospitals in Antananarivo (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Mère-Enfant de Tsaralalàna (CHUMET), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Joseph Ravoahangy Andrianavalona (CHUJRA) and Centre de Santé Maternelle et Infantile de Tsaralalàna), the Office National de Nutrition de Madagascar and the Office Régional de Nutrition Analamanga, the Direction de Lutte contre les Infections Sexuellement Transmissibles de Madagascar) and (Centre de Santé d’Ankasina et Centre de Santé d’ Andranomanalina Isotry) as well as the community health workers and administrative authorities in the corresponding arrondissements and quartiers. We also wish to than the Institut Pasteur, the Institut Pasteur de Madagascar and the Experimental Bacteriology team for their continuous support and our project managers RANARIJESY Marc Rovatiana, Mamy Ny Aina RATSIALONINA and Jane Deuve. AFRIBIOTA Investigators (Group authorship in alphabetical order): Annick Robinson, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Mère Enfant de Tsaralalana, Antananarivo, Madagascar, Aurélie Etienne, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France/ Institut Pasteur de Madagascar, Darragh Duffy, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France, Emilson Jean Andriatahirintsoa, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Mère Enfant de Tsaralalana, Antananarivo, Francis Allan Hunald, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Joseph Ravoahangy Andrianavalona (CHU-JRA), Antananarivo, Madagascar, Harifetra Mamy Richard Randriamizao, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Joseph, Ravoahangy Andrianavalona (CHU-JRA), Antananarivo, Madagascar, Inès Vigan-Womas, Institut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo, Madagascar, Jean-Chrysostome Gody, Complexe Pédiatrique de Bangui, Bangui, Central, African Republic, Jean-Marc Collard, Institut Pasteur de Madagascar Antananarivo, Madagascar, Laura Schaeffer, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France, Lisette Raharimalala, Centre social Materno-Infantile, Tsaralalana, Antananarivo, Madagascar, Maheninasy Rakotondrainipiana, Institut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo, Madagascar, Milena Hasan, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France, Pascale Vonaesch, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France, Philippe Sansonetti, Institut Pasteur, Paris, France, Ravoahangy Andrianavalona (CHU-JRA), Antananarivo, Madagascar, Madagascar, Rindra Randremanana, Institut Pasteur de Madagascar, Antananarivo, Madagascar, Serge Ghislain Djorie, Institut Pasteur de Bangui, Bangui, Central African, Republic.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

PV was supported by an Early Postdoctoral Fellowship (P2EZP3_152159), an Advanced Postdoctoral Fellowship (P300PA_177876) as well as a Return Grant (P3P3PA_17877) from the Swiss National Science Foundation, a Roux-Cantarini Fellowship (2016) and a L'Oréal-UNESCO for Women in Science France Fellowship (2017). The parasitology part of AFRIBIOTA was funded by the Total Foundation (2016) as well as the Fondation Petram (2014). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Brooker S, Clements AC, Bundy DA. Global epidemiology, ecology and control of soil-transmitted helminth infections. Adv Parasitol. 2006;62:221–261. 10.1016/S0065-308X(05)62007-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hotez P.J. Forgotten People, Forgotten Diseases: The Neglected Tropical Diseases and Their Impact on Global Health and Development. Washington, DC: ASM Press; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Papier K, Williams GM, Luceres-Catubig R, Ahmed F, Olveda RM, McManus DP, et al. Childhood malnutrition and parasitic helminth interactions. Clin Infect Dis. 2014. July 15;59(2):234–43. 10.1093/cid/ciu211 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ahmed A, Al-Mekhlafi HM, Al-Adhroey AH, Ithoi I, Abdulsalam AM, Surin J. The nutritional impacts of soil-transmitted helminths infections among Orang Asli schoolchildren in rural Malaysia. Parasit Vectors. 2012;5:119. Published 2012 Jun 15. 10.1186/1756-3305-5-119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cimino RO, Jeun R, Juarez M, Cajal PS, Vargas P, Echazú A, et al. Identification of human intestinal parasites affecting an asymptomatic peri-urban Argentinian population using multi-parallel quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Parasites & Vectors 2015; 17;8:380. 10.1186/s13071-015-0994-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kotloff KL, Nataro JP, Blackwelder WC, Nasrin D, Farag TH, Panchalingam S, et al. Burden and aetiology of diarrhoeal disease in infants and young children in developing countries (the Global Enteric Multicenter Study, GEMS): a prospective, case-control study. Lancet. 2013. July 20;382(9888):209–22. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60844-2 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, Lim S, Shibuya K, Aboyans V, et al. (2012) Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 380: 2095–2128. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61728-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kotloff KL, Nataro JP, Blackwelder WC, Nasrin D, Farag TH, Panchalingam S, et al. (2013) Burden and aetiology of diarrhoeal disease in infants and young children in developing countries (the Global Enteric Multicenter Study, GEMS): a prospective, case-control study. Lancet 382: 209–222. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60844-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Lane S, Lloyd D. Current trends in research into the waterborne parasite Giardia. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2002;28(2):123–147. 10.1080/1040-840291046713 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Checkley W, White AC Jr, Jaganath D, Arrowood MJ, Chalmers RM, Chen XM, et al. A review of the global burden, novel diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccine targets for cryptosporidium. Lancet Infect Dis. 2015;15(1):85–94. 10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70772-8 PMCID: PMC4401121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Stanley SL Jr. Amoebiasis. Lancet. 2003;361(9362):1025–1034. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12830-9 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Turkeltaub JA, McCarty TR 3rd, Hotez PJ. The intestinal protozoa: emerging impact on global health and development. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2015;31(1):38–44. 10.1097/MOG.0000000000000135 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Efunshile MA, Ngwu BA, Kurtzhals JA, Sahar S, König B, Stensvold CR. Molecular Detection of the Carriage Rate of Four Intestinal Protozoa with Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction: Possible Overdiagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica in Nigeria. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015;93(2):257–262. 10.4269/ajtmh.14-0781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hakami L, Castle PM, Kiernan J, Choi K, Rahantamalala A, Rakotomalala E, et al. Epidemiology of soil transmitted helminth and Strongyloides stercoralis infections in remote rural villages of Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar. Pathog Glob Health. 2019. Mar;113(2):94–100. 10.1080/20477724.2019.1589927 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Randremanana R, Randrianirina F, Gousseff M, Dubois N, Razafindratsimandresy R, Hariniana ER, et al. Case-control study of the etiology of infant diarrheal disease in 14 districts in Madagascar. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44533. 10.1371/journal.pone.0044533 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Remonja CR, Rakotoarison R, Rakotonirainy NH, Mangahasimbola RT, Randrianarisoa AB, Jambou R, et al. The importance of public health, poverty reduction programs and women’s empowerment in the reduction of child stunting in rural areas of Moramanga and Morondava, Madagascar. PLoS One. 2017. Oct 18;12(10):e0186493. 10.1371/journal.pone.0186493 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Valiathan R, Ashman M, Asthana D. Effects of Ageing on the Immune System: Infants to Elderly. Scand J Immunol. 2016. April;83(4):255–66. 10.1111/sji.12413 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Papier Keren, Williams Gail M., Ruby Luceres-Catubig Faruk Ahmed, et al. Childhood Malnutrition and Parasitic Helminth Interactions. Clin Infect Dis. 2014. July 15;59(2):234–43. 10.1093/cid/ciu211 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Stephenson LS, Latham MC, Ottesen EA. Malnutrition and parasitic helminth infections. Parasitology. 2000;121 Suppl:S23–S38. 10.1017/s0031182000006491 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Robertson LJ, Crompton DW, Sanjur D, Nesheim MC. Haemoglobin concentrations and concomitant infections of hookworm and Trichuris trichiura in Panamanian primary schoolchildren. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1992;86(6):654–656. 10.1016/0035-9203(92)90176-d [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Carvalho-Costa FA, Gonçalves AQ, Lassance SL, Silva Neto LM, Salmazo CA, Bóia MN. Giardia lamblia and other intestinal parasitic infections and their relationships with nutritional status in children in Brazilian Amazon. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2007. May-Jun;49(3):147–53. 10.1590/s0036-46652007000300003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.World Bank. World development indicators 2016
  • 23.INSTAT (2014) Enquête nationale sur le suivi des indicateurs des objectifs du Millenaire pour le developpement durable 2012±2013:Madagascar
  • 24.UNICEF. Improving child nutrition. The achievable imperative for global progress. 2013
  • 25.Katz N, Chaves A, Pellegrino J. A simple device for quantitative stool thick-smear technique in Schistosomiasis mansoni. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 1972;14(6):397–400. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Knopp S, Salim N, Schindler T, Voules D.A.K, Rothen J, Lweno O, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of Kato-Katz, FLOTAC, Baermann, and PCR methods for the detection of light-intensity hookworm and Strongyloides stercoralis infections in Tanzania. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014;90(3):535–545. 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0268 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Mejia R, Vicuña Y, Broncano N, Sandoval C, Vaca M, Chico M, et al. A novel, multi-parallel, real-time polymerase chain reaction approach for eight gastrointestinal parasites provides improved diagnostic capabilities to resource-limited at-risk populations. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013;88(6):1041–1047. 10.4269/ajtmh.12-0726 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Llewellyn S, Inpankaew T, Nery SV, Gray DJ, Verweij JJ, Clements AC, et al. Application of a Multiplex Quantitative PCR to Assess Prevalence and Intensity Of Intestinal Parasite Infections in a Controlled Clinical Trial. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(1):e0004380. Published 2016 Jan 28. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004380 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Tanyuksel M, Petri WA Jr. Laboratory diagnosis of amebiasis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003. October;16(4):713–29. 10.1128/cmr.16.4.713-729.2003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Basuni M, Muhi J, Othman N, Verweij JJ, Ahmad M, Miswan N, et al. A pentaplex real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for detection of four species of soil-transmitted helminths. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;84(2):338–343. 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.10-0499 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Haque R, Roy S, Siddique A, Mondal U, Rahman S.M.M, Mondal D, et al. Multiplex real-time PCR assay for detection of Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia intestinalis, and Cryptosporidium spp. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007;76(4):713–717. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Vonaesch P, Randremanana R, Gody JC, Collard JM, Giles-Vernick T, Doria M, et al. Identifying the etiology and pathophysiology underlying stunting and environmental enteropathy: study protocol of the AFRIBIOTA project. BMC Pediatr. 2018;18(1):236. Published 2018 Jul 19. 10.1186/s12887-018-1189-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group. WHO child growth standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatr Suppl. 2006. April;450:76–85. 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2006.tb02378.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Onis M. WHO child growth standards: head circumference-for-age, arm circumference-for-age, triceps skinfold-for-age and subscapular skinfold-for-age: methods and development. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/43706
  • 35.SAPERO JJ, LAWLESS DK. The MIF stain-preservation technic for the identification of intestinal protozoa. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1953;2(4):613–619. 10.4269/ajtmh.1953.2.613 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.World Health Organization (1991) Basic laboratory methods in medical parasitology. Geneva: World Health Organization. pp 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Pilotte N, Papaiakovou M, Grant JR, Bierwert LN, Llewellyn S, McCarthy JS, et al. Improved PCR-Based Detection of Soil Transmitted Helminth Infections Using a Next-Generation Sequencing Approach to Assay Design. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(3):e0004578. Published 2016 Mar 30. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004578 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Verweij JJ, Blangé RA, Templeton K, Schinkel J, Brienen E.A.T, van Rooyen M.A.A, et al. Simultaneous detection of Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, and Cryptosporidium parvum in fecal samples by using multiplex real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(3):1220–1223. 10.1128/jcm.42.3.1220-1223.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.ten Hove RJ, van Lieshout L, Brienen EA, Perez MA, Verweij JJ. Real-time polymerase chain reaction for detection of Isospora belli in stool samples. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008;61(3):280–283. 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.03.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Verweij JJ, Ten Hove R, Brienen EA, van Lieshout L. Multiplex detection of Enterocytozoon bieneusi and Encephalitozoon spp. in fecal samples using real-time PCR. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2007;57(2):163–167. 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2006.08.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Efunshile MA, Ngwu BA, Kurtzhals JA, Sahar S, König B, Stensvold CR. Molecular Detection of the Carriage Rate of Four Intestinal Protozoa with Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction: Possible Overdiagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica in Nigeria. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015. August;93(2):257–62. 10.4269/ajtmh.14-0781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Randremanana R, Randrianirina F, Gousseff M, Dubois N, Razafindratsimandresy R, Hariniana E, et al. Case-control study of the etiology of infant diarrheal disease in 14 districts in Madagascar. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44533. 10.1371/journal.pone.0044533 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Kightlinger LK, Seed JR, Kightlinger MB. The epidemiology of Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura, and hookworm in children in the Ranomafana rainforest, Madagascar. J Parasitol. 1995;81(2):159–169. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Greigert V, Abou-Bacar A, Brunet J, Céline N, Alexander W.P, Leila B, et al. Human intestinal parasites in Mahajanga, Madagascar: The kingdom of the protozoa. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0204576. Published 2018 Oct 10. 10.1371/journal.pone.0204576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Buchy P. Les parasitoses digestives dans la région de Mahajanga, côte Ouest de Madagascar [Intestinal parasitoses in the Mahajanga region, west coast of Madagascar]. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 2003. March;96(1):41–5. French. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Farthing Cevallos, Kelly. Intestinal protozoa. In: Cook G, editor. Mansons Tropical Diseases. London: WB Saunders; 1996. pp. 1255–98. [Google Scholar] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Diarrhea Moffat T., respiratory infections, protozoan gastrointestinal parasites, and child growth in Kathmandu, Nepal. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2003. September;122(1):85–97. 10.1002/ajpa.10258 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Mondal D, Petri WA Jr, Sack RB, Kirkpatrick BD, Haque R. Entamoeba histolytica-associated diarrheal illness is negatively associated with the growth of preschool children: evidence from a prospective study. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2006. November;100(11):1032–8. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.12.012 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.LaBeaud AD, Nayakwadi Singer M, McKibben M, Mungai P, Muchiri EM, McKibben E, et al. Parasitism in Children Aged Three Years and Under: Relationship between Infection and Growth in Rural Coastal Kenya. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015. May 21;9(5):e0003721. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.World Health Organization. Soil-transmitted helminthiasis, eliminating soil transmitted Helminthiases as a public health problem in children, progress report 2001–2010 and strategic plan 2011–2020. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44804/1/9789241503129_eng.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Wimmersberger D, Coulibaly JT, Schulz JD, Puchkow M, Huwyler J, N’Gbesso Y, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Ivermectin Against Trichuris trichiura in Preschool-aged and School-aged Children: A Randomized Controlled Dose-finding Trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(8):1247–1255. 10.1093/cid/ciy246 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Omoigberale AI, Airauhi LU. Aspects of the epidemiology of intestinal parasitoses (IP) in children: knowledge, practices and perceptions of mothers. Niger J Clin Pract. 2006;9(2):109–113. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Okyay P, Ertug S, Gultekin B, Onen O, Beser E. Intestinal parasites prevalence and related factors in school children, a western city sample—Turkey. BMC Public Health. 2004. December 22;4:64. 10.1186/1471-2458-4-64 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Quihui L, Valencia ME, Crompton DW, Phillips S, Hagan P, Morales G, et al. Role of the employment status and education of mothers in the prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in Mexican rural schoolchildren. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:225. Published 2006 Sep 6. 10.1186/1471-2458-6-225 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Nematian J, Nematian E, Gholamrezanezhad A, Asgari AA. Prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections and their relation with socio-economic factors and hygienic habits in Tehran primary school students. Acta Trop. 2004;92(3):179–186. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2004.06.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Okyay P, Ertug S, Gultekin B, Onen O, Beser E. Intestinal parasites prevalence and related factors in school children, a western city sample—Turkey. BMC Public Health. 2004;4:64. Published 2004 Dec 22. 10.1186/1471-2458-4-64 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Forson AO, Arthur I, Ayeh-Kumi PF. The role of family size, employment and education of parents in the prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in school children in Accra. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0192303. Published 2018 Feb 7. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192303 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Rakotomanana EFN. Hygiène, alimentation et environnement: cas de deux familles d’enfants en retard de croissance dans les quartiers défavorisés d’Antananarivo. Mémoire de recherche présenté en vue de l’obtention du Master 2. 2017 [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Ostan I, Kilimcioğlu AA, Girginkardeşler N, Ozyurt BC, Limoncu ME, et al. Health inequities: lower socio-economic conditions and higher incidences of intestinal parasites. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:342. Published 2007 Nov 27. 10.1186/1471-2458-7-342 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Muadica AS, Balasegaram S, Beebeejaun K, Köster PC, Bailo B, Hernández-de-Mingo et al. Risk associations for intestinal parasites in symptomatic and asymptomatic schoolchildren in central Mozambique. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020. June 4:S1198-743X(20)30308-6. 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.031 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Gamboa MI, Basualdo JA, Córdoba MA, Pezzani BC, Minvielle MC, et al. Distribution of intestinal parasitoses in relation to environmental and sociocultural parameters in La Plata, Argentina. J Helminthol. 2003;77(1):15–20. 10.1079/JOH2002142 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Campbell SJ, Nery SV, McCarthy JS, Gray DJ, Soares Magalhães RJ, Clements ACA. A Critical Appraisal of Control Strategies for Soil-Transmitted Helminths. Trends Parasitol. 2016. February;32(2):97–107. 10.1016/j.pt.2015.10.006 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Krauth SJ, Coulibaly JT, Knopp S, Traoré M, N’Goran EK, et al. (2012) An In-Depth Analysis of a Piece of Shit: Distribution of Schistosoma mansoni and Hookworm Eggs in Human Stool. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 6: e1969. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001969 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Basuni M, Muhi J, Othman N, Verweij JJ, Ahmad M, et al. (2011) A pentaplex real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for detection of four species of soil-transmitted helminths. Am J Trop Med Hyg 84: 338–343. 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.10-0499 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Traub R, Inpankaew T, Reid S, Sutthikornchai C, Sukthana Y, et al. (2009) Transmission cycles of Giardia duodenalis in dogs and humans in Temple communities in Bangkok-a critical evaluation of its prevalence using three diagnostic tests in the field in the absence of a gold standard. Acta Trop 111:125–132. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2009.03.006 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Masny A, Rozej W, Gołab E. Opracowanie wydajnych procedur izolacji DNA Cryptosporidium sp. i Trichinella spiralis z próbek kału [Development of efficient DNA isolation procedures for Cryptosporidium and Trichinella PCR detection in fecal samples]. Med Dosw Mikrobiol. 2009;61(3):259–65. Polish. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Llewellyn S, Inpankaew T, Nery SV, Gray DJ, Verweij JJ, Clements AC, et al. Application of a Multiplex Quantitative PCR to Assess Prevalence and Intensity of Intestinal Parasite Infections in a Controlled Clinical Trial. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016. January 28; 10(1):e0004380. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004380 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Vonaesch P, Morien E, Andrianonimiadana L, Sanke H, Mbecko JR, Huus KE, et al. Stunted childhood growth is associated with decompartmentalization of the gastrointestinal tract and overgrowth of oropharyngeal taxa. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018. September 4;115(36):E8489–E8498. 10.1073/pnas.1806573115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009333.r001

Decision Letter 0

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran, Marco Coral-Almeida

14 Oct 2020

Dear Mr HABIB,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "High prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among stunted and control children aged 2 to 5 years old in two neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar" 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.

One of the reviewers has recommended that the manuscript be rejected on the basis that it lacks originality but the editors have decided to disregard this recommendation. Therefore you need not respond to this particular comment.

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,

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marco Coral-Almeida

Deputy Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

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

One of the reviewers has recommended that the manuscript be rejected on the basis that it lacks originality but the editors have decided to disregard this recommendation. Therefore you need not respond to this particular comment.

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: - Objective would have been articulated further more clear though it is with a testable hypothesis.

- Study design is appropriate to address the stated objectives.

- Population is clearly defined with reference to a previous publication

- Sample size is sufficient for this study

- Although matched analysis is not performed, it may not be needed in this context.

- There are no concerns about ethical requirements

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

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: - Analysis presented matches with the analysis plan

- Results are clearly and completely presented

- figures (Tables, Images) are of sufficient quality for clarity

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

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: - conclusions are supported by the data presented

- limitations of analysis are clearly described

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

- public health relevance is addressed

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

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: (No Response)

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 study by Habib and co-authors is a good, well performed and nicely written piece of work of high epidemiological value for the area under study. However, in my opinion, this investigation lacks the originality required for publication in PLoS NTDs. The main conclusions of the study include the high prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections (IPIs) in children from low-income tropical regions (in spite of MDA programs), the risk factors associated with these diseases, and the low sensitivity of optical microscopy vs. molecular biology techniques for the diagnosis of low-burden IPIs. These aspects are not novel for the field of parasitology, as they have been repeatedly observed in a number of regions with similar epidemiological characteristics and published elsewhere. Therefore, I strongly encourage the authors to submit their research to a different journal, whose scope fits better with the topic of the study.

Reviewer #2: Comments to the authors

In this paper Habib et al. attempt to describe the occurrence of enteric parasites, including helminthic and protist species, and their association with severe and moderate stunting and other risk factors in children under five years of age living in deprived areas of Antananarivo, Madagascar. Surveyed paediatric populations included community children and children seeking medical attention at hospital settings, and were correctly matched by sex, age, neighbourhood and sampling season. Enteric pathogens were detected by conventional microscopy (MIF and KK) methods and qPCR. Near 100% of the surveyed children were infected by at least one parasitic species. No differences were found between stunted and non-stunted children according to their infection status by enteric parasites. No molecular studies were conducted to ascertain the molecular diversity (in terms of genotypes and sub-genotypes) of the main protist species found, particularly G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp., and E. bieneusi. The study is relevant because provides important epidemiological data regarding the presence of enteric parasites of public health relevance. However, there are a number of issues that need attention and clarification and that probably have biased the results obtained, their interpretation, and the conclusions reached by the Authors.

Mayor issues

1. Introduction section, line 74-75: please mention here Cryptosporidium spp. Please note that Cryptosporidium is second only to rotavirus in causing diarrhoea and death in children younger than five years in developing countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. See for instance Kotloff et al. Lancet. 2013;382:209-22 or Sow et al. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:e0004729.

2. Introduction section, lines 76-77: this statement may be misleading and should be rephrased. Please note that large case-control epidemiological studies conducted in Africa have demonstrated that G. intestinalis was more common in controls than in cases. See for instance Becker et al. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015;21:591.e1-10; Breurec et al. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:e0004283; Tellevik et al. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9:e0004125; and Kotloff et al. Lancet. 2013;382:209-22.

3. Introduction section, lines 81-82: please note that these very same effects have also been described in children infected with G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp., and E. histolytica. See for instance Berkman et al. Lancet. 2002;59:564-571; Carvalho-Costa et al. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo. 2007;49:147-153; and Mondal et al. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2006;100:1032-1038.

4. Introduction section, lines 106-108: please note that E. histolytica cysts are morphologically indistinguishable from other non-pathogenic Entamoeba species including E. dispar, E. moskowki, and E. Bangladeshi. Unambiguous detection of E. histolytica should be based on species-specific methods such as PCR. Please notice that incorrect diagnosis of E. histolytica by microscopy examination has led to estimating wrong prevalence rates for this pathogen. See for instance Efunshile et al. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015;93:257-62. Amend. Same comment for lines 281-282, 324-325, and 328. Please provide the prevalence rate of E. histolytica taking qPCR (not microscopy) as diagnostic method. This should must be conducted through the whole manuscript including the statistical analyses in Table 6, Figure 3, and Figure 4.

5. Introduction section: please provide a paragraph summarizing the current epidemiological scenario of IPIs in Madagascar. Provide data on the range of reported prevalences, populations (general, paediatric, clinical, etc.) surveyed, geographical areas investigated and any other information (e.g. seasonality) that may be relevant to understand the distribution and transmission of these infections.

6. Line 124: what is the Afribiota study? Is this survey taking advantage of that other survey, or is it part of it? What were the main goals of the Afribiota study? Information provided in lines 130 and below is insufficient. Please clarify.

7. Line 188: please clarify whether the PCR-detection of Cryptosporidium species was specific for C. parvum or included also other species such as C. hominis and C. meleagridis. This is important as C. hominis is the Cryptosporidium species most commonly identified in humans globally.

8. Line 284: please replace “Blastocystis hominis” by “Blastocystis sp.” as this heterokont protist is not human-specific. See Stensvold et al. Trend Parasitol. 3007;23:93-96. Please amend here and through the whole manuscript.

9. Results section, lines 269-286: please replace these paragraphs with a new Table showing the diversity and frequency of IPIs in the two neighbourhoods surveyed. Information provided in the main body of the text should only refer to the most important data of the Table.

10. Results section, lines 287-291: same comment as above for the coinfections detected.

11. Results section. No attempts were conducted to genotype samples with a positive result to G. intestinalis, Cryptosporidium spp. and E. bieneusi. Although this was not the primary goal of the survey, unravelling the genetic diversity of these pathogens is a task that should be conducted in future studies. This should be stated as a limitation of the study in the Discussion section in lines 482-488.

12. Discussion section: please provide more information about previous epidemiological studies conducted in Madagascar, e.g. in lines 378. Please make every effort to put obtained results in the right context by comparing them with previous data in the country. If possible, compare prevalence rates, detection methods, population types, and geographical areas.

13. Discussion section, line 445: for waterborne transmission of G. intestinalis and other protist parasites see Muadica et al. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.031. This paper should be mentioned and adequately discussed here.

14. Discussion section, lines 461-464: please add to this list the potential presence of PCR inhibitors in the extracted and purified genomic DNAs.

Minor issues

1. Line 32: Giardia intestinalis should be italicised.

2. Line 33: Entamoeba histolytica should be italycised.

3. Line 34: Ascaris lumbricoides should be italicised.

4. Line 58: please remove “or more” (rephrase as “…with at least one parasite species”).

5. Lines 156 and 157: what was the difference between the variables “household waste” and “waste”? Please clarify. Also, what was the meaning of the variable “cooked”? Please clarify.

6. Line 160: mothers (lower case).

7. Line 175: “triturated” is not probably the best term to be used here. Amend.

8. Line 221: Escherichia coli in full and italicised. Species names should be named in full the first time they are mentioned in the text.

9. Lines 275 and 435: Giardia intestinalis. In full at the beginning of a new sentence.

10. Line 494: E. spp.? Please indicate the genus.

Reviewer #3: This manuscript arising from AFRIBIOTA study presents that prevalence of intestinal parasites are higher among stunted and control children and compares the detection rate of various methods.

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

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: David Carmena

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, 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 https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/submission-guidelines#loc-methods

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009333.r003

Decision Letter 1

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran, Marco Coral-Almeida

3 Feb 2021

Dear Mr HABIB,

Thank you very much for submitting the revised manuscript "High prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among stunted and control children aged 2 to 5 years old in two neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar" for consideration at PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. The reviewers appreciated the effort put in to revise the manuscript. 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,

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (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: Lines 356-357 (Figure 3): Given that infections’ prevalence are calculated as the ratio between the number of cases and the number of individuals in the population, I am not clear about how the error bars in Figure 3 were calculated. Please clarify.

Reviewer #2: (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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (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: - Please revise the writing of the parasite species throughout the text. In particular, use full binomial name only the first time a given species is mentioned. After that, abbreviate the genus as the initial followed by a full stop. Since the latter form is not actually an abbreviation, but a consensus to use species’ scientific names in a text, it does not need to be specified in brackets, as in lines 218-221. Moreover, please do not abbreviate Encephalitozoon spp. as E. spp.

- Line 222: Please indicate the probe format (e.g., TaqMan).

- Line 232: Please provide centrifugation speed in x g.

- Lines 280-281: The abbreviations for severely, moderately and non-stunted should have been introduced in lines 163 and 166, where these words are used for the first time. From there to the end of the text use the abbreviature (e.g., in line 287). The same comment applies to other abbreviations such as EPG (line 383), IPIs (line 395) or STH (line 402), all of which had been already used before.

- Line 293: In order to maintain the text consistency, please add the p-value for differences between female and male participants. Same in lines 325 (for age group) and 328 (for mother’s educational level).

- Line 325: Indicate the meaning of AOR and CI the first time that these abbreviations are used in the text. Moreover, keep the same format throughout the text, i.e., indicate CI always in, or outside, brackets.

- Line 340: In order to maintain consistency with the header of the previous subsection, here it should be “Potential risk […]”.

- Line 365: Add “target” before “DNA loads”.

- Line 354: Please replace “between” by “determined by”

- Lines 373-378: Please re-write caption for Fig 4 to explain what is shown in the figure, but without describing the results. Please indicate the results of which species are shown in each panel (A, B and C) and clarify that what is compared in each graph are the Ct values obtained in PCR positive samples for microscopy positive and negative samples.

- Figure 4C: Keep the same order and colour used for positive and negative samples in panels A and B.

- Line 382: Rather than a positive correlation, Figure 5 shows an inverse relationship between the number of A. lumbricoides EPG of faeces and the Ct values determined by qPCR. This is indeed the expected result, because based on the principles of the qPCR, the higher the parasite burden (i.e., target DNA amount) is, the lower the Ct value should be. Revise this also in line 537.

- Figure 5: It is curious to me that all KK samples positive por A. lumbricoides showed mean EPG of faeces equal to either 1,000 or 10,000. How could this be explained?

- Line 385: The adjective “major” is confusing here; please rephrase.

- Line 419: “were” instead of “was”.

- Line 431: “disease” instead of “infection”.

- Line 433 (and through the discussion): Provide references. Same in lines: 444, 467, 508, 523, 525, 528, 543.

- Line 401 (and through the discussion): Do not repeat numeric results, neither reference to figures, in the discussion. Same in lines: 403, 439-40, 464-5, 475, 483, 485, 489, 500, 519, 530, 536-7, 565-6.

- Line 487: Please replace “isolated” by “identified”.

- Line 490: Please indicate where the studies by Osten and Muadica were conducted.

- Lines 498-500: A word seems to be missing in this phrase.

- Lines 503-504: A word seems to be missing in this phrase.

- Line 506: “STH” instead of “SHT”.

- Lines 512-516: “in this study” is repeated twice in the same sentence.

- Line 572: Non-pathogenic parasites could also be diagnosed by PCR if desired, therefore, this does not add a value to the use of microscopy-based techniques.

- Please revise tables and figures to make sure full names of parasites are provided the first time they are mentioned in a given table/figure, and that they are always written using italics. Similarly, double check that all abbreviations used in tables/figures are properly defined in the table headers or footnotes, or in the figure legends.

Reviewer #2: Minor comments

1. Line 98: please note that E. coli is considered a commensal rather than a parasitic species. Please amend.

2. Line 129: “…fecal smears after fecal concentration.”.

3. Line 131: E. histolytica. Once the species has been fully named the first time it appears in the text, please use the abbreviated form. Same comment for other parasite species that are mentioned through the whole manuscript.

4. Line 138: [26,30,31]? Please double check PLoS NTD editing style for references.

5. Line 167: Standard Deviation (SD).

6. Line 409: =<3%? Do you mean ≤3%? Please clarify.

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

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: I congratulate the Authors fo the effort and time devoted to improve the quality of the manuscript.

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

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: David Carmena

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.0009333.r005

Decision Letter 2

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran, Marco Coral-Almeida

25 Mar 2021

Dear Mr HABIB,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'High prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among stunted and control children aged 2 to 5 years old in two neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar' 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,

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Marco Coral-Almeida

Deputy Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

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

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009333.r006

Acceptance letter

Arunasalam Pathmeswaran, Marco Coral-Almeida

14 Apr 2021

Dear Mr HABIB,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "High prevalence of intestinal parasite infestations among stunted and control children aged 2 to 5 years old in two neighborhoods of Antananarivo, Madagascar," 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 Data. Supporting data.

    As: Ascaris lumbricoides. T.t: Trichuris trichiura. E.v: Enterobius vermicularis. H.n: Hymenolepis nana. Ank: Ancylostoma spp. E.c: Entamoeba coli. E.n: Endolimax nana. E.ha: Entamoeba hartmanni. G.i: Giardia intestinalis. B.sp: Blastocystis sp. Eh/d: Entamoeba histolytica/dispar. Cm: Chilomastix mesnilii. Cp: Cryptosporidium parvum. Ib: Isospora belli. Eb: Enterocytozon bieneusi. Espp: Encephalitozoon spp. KK: kato-katz. N.O: No Observation, stool not sufficient for the technique. The numbers on the KK results are the number of eggs observed per gram of stool. In the column of MIF: sign+: low parasite load sign++: average parasite load sign+++: high parasite load. In the columns of Micro_As, Micro_Gi and Micro_Eh: sign+: mean positif result sign-: mean negative result. Polyparasitism column: faible: low moyen: medium forte: high zero: no polyparasitism. In all columns with 1 and 0: 1: positive result 0: negative result. In the column of statut_nut: NN: nonstunted children (control). MCM: Moderately stunted children. MCS: severely stunted children. In Tt column: 10000: High load 1000: medium load 100: low load 0: negative result. In As_kk column: 10000: High load 1000: medium load 100: low load 0: negative result.

    (XLSX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reponse_to_reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


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

    RESOURCES