MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of mass deworming with antihelminthics for soil-transmitted helminths during pregnancy

2021· review· en· W3162102920 on OpenAlexaff
Rehana A Salam, Jai K Das, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDewormingPregnancyHookworm InfectionsIron deficiencyClinical trialHelminthiasisPediatricsObstetricsAnemiaImmunologyInternal medicineHelminthsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Helminthiasis is an infestation of the human body with parasitic worms. It is estimated to affect 44 million pregnancies, globally, each year. Intestinal helminthiasis (hookworm infestation) is associated with blood loss and decreased supply of nutrients for erythropoiesis, resulting in iron-deficiency anaemia. Over 50% of the pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) suffer from iron-deficiency anaemia. Though iron-deficiency anaemia is multifactorial, hookworm infestation is a major contributory cause in women of reproductive age in endemic areas. Antihelminthics are highly efficacious, but evidence of their beneficial effect and safety when given during pregnancy has not been established. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of mass deworming with antihelminthics for soil-transmitted helminths (STH) during the second or third trimester of pregnancy on maternal and pregnancy outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (8 March 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all prospective randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of administration of antihelminthics versus placebo or no treatment during the second or third trimester of pregnancy; both individual-randomised and cluster-randomised trials were eligible. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and studies that were only available as abstracts with insufficient information. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, checked accuracy and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of six trials (24 reports) that randomised 7873 pregnant women. All of the included trials were conducted in antenatal clinics within hospitals in LMICs (Uganda, Nigeria, Peru, India, Sierra Leone and Tanzania). Among primary outcomes, five trials reported maternal anaemia, one trial reported preterm birth and three trials reported perinatal mortality. Among secondary outcomes, included trials reported maternal worm prevalence, low birthweight (LBW) and birthweight. None of the included studies reported maternal anthropometric measures or infant survival at six months. Overall, we judged the included trials to be generally at low risk of bias for most domains, while the certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate. Analysis suggests that administration of a single dose of antihelminthics in the second trimester of pregnancy may reduce maternal anaemia by 15% (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.00; I²= 86%; 5 trials, 5745 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of antihelminthics during pregnancy on preterm birth (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.86; 1 trial, 1042 participants; low-certainty evidence) or perinatal mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.52; 3 trials, 3356 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of antihelminthics during pregnancy on hookworm (average RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.93; Tau² = 1.76, I² = 99%; 2 trials, 2488 participants; low-certainty evidence). Among other secondary outcomes, findings suggest that administration of antihelminthics during pregnancy may reduce the prevalence of trichuris (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.98; I²=75%; 2 trials, 2488 participants; low-certainty evidence) and ascaris (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.29; I²= 0%; 2 trials, 2488 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antihelminthics during pregnancy probably make little or no difference to LBW (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.16; 3 trials, 2960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and birthweight (mean difference 0.00 kg, 95% CI -0.03 kg to 0.04 kg; 3 trials, 2960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that administration of a single dose of antihelminthics in the second trimester of pregnancy may reduce maternal anaemia and worm prevalence when used in settings with high prevalence of maternal helminthiasis. Further data is needed to establish the benefit of antihelminthic treatment on other maternal and pregnancy outcomes. Future research should focus on evaluating the effect of these antihelminthics among various subgroups in order to assess whether the effect varies. Future studies could also assess the effectiveness of co-interventions and health education along with antihelminthics for maternal and pregnancy outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207