Table 1. Parameters and assumptions for use case 1: stopping IDA.

Calculations were based on testing a 1% infection prevalence threshold and considered two potential scenarios:     • "Single test" approach in which a new assay would replace the current tools (i.e., FTS/BRT) in the TAS; and     • "Decision confirmatory test" approach in which the new diagnostic test would be used as a decision confirmatory assay on individuals testing positive by FTS/BRT. Results of the confirmatory test would be used to make a program decision at a population level as opposed to an individual clinical treatment decision or confirmation of the first test result. Assumptions made for sensitivity and specificity calculations:     • FTS/BRT is 90% sensitive for detecting Mf-positive individuals; FTS specificity 100% outside of Loa loa co-endemic areas     • Survey design: 30-cluster; equal probability of selection     • “Single test” approach: 80% power to correctly conclude that a defined population with a true prevalence ≤0.2% (ideal) or = 0% (minimum) is below the 1% threshold     • “Decision confirmatory test” approach: 80% power to correctly conclude that a defined population with a true prevalence ≤0.5% (ideal) or ≤ 0.2% (minimum) is below the 1% threshold     • α ≤5% (i.e., Type 1 error rate); meaning that using this diagnostic test, the survey would incorrectly conclude that prevalence in a defined population is below the 1% threshold <5% of the time