Evaluation of Hookworm Diagnosis Techniques from Patients in Debre Elias and Sanja Districts of the Amhara Region, Ethiopia

Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. Methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja dist...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of parasitology research Vol. 2021; pp. 1 - 7
Main Authors Zeleke, Ayalew Jejaw, Addisu, Ayenew, Derso, Adane, Tegegne, Yalewayker, Birhanie, Meseret, Sisay, Tekeba, Aemero, Mulugeta
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Hindawi 2021
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Wiley
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2090-0023
2090-0031
2090-0031
DOI10.1155/2021/6682330

Cover

Loading…
Abstract Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. Methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa (κ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests. Result. A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement=100%, kappa=1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity. Conclusion. Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
AbstractList Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods.BACKGROUNDInappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods.An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa (κ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests.METHODSAn institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa (κ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests.A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement = 100%, kappa = 1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity.RESULTA total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement = 100%, kappa = 1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity.Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.CONCLUSIONHookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. Methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa (κ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests. Result. A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement=100%, kappa=1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity. Conclusion. Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa ( ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests. A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement = 100%, kappa = 1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity. Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. Methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa (? ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests. Result. A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement (agreement=100%, kappa=1) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity. Conclusion. Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm diagnosis methods. Methods. An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted from patients in Debre Elias and Sanja districts of the Amhara region, Ethiopia, from November 2019 to January 2020. The study subjects were selected conveniently. After the data was entered into Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, test accuracy, and agreement of the different hookworm diagnosis methods, namely, test tube flotation technique (TFT), McMaster (MM), formol-ether concentration (FEC), Kato-Katz (KK), and direct wet mount microscopy (DWMM), were calculated by using SPSS software. The composite reference standard (CRS) was used as the gold standard method. The kappa ( κ ) test was used to measure the level of agreement between diagnosis tests. Result. A total of 389 stool samples were collected from patients in the study. The overall prevalence of hookworm was 63.24%. The test tube flotation technique (TFT) was found to be the highest both in terms of sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy (100%). McMaster (MM) was the second most sensitive test (68.7%), followed by FEC (44.3%) and KK (38.2%). On the other hand, DWMM had the lowest sensitivity (37.4%), and its diagnostic accuracy was also the least (60%). Only TFT had a perfect agreement ( agreement = 100 % , kappa = 1 ) with the CRS. The sensitivity of DWMM, KK, and FEC showed a kind of linear function with the intensity of infection, but TFT and MM methods were not affected by the infection intensity. Conclusion. Hookworm is still a public health problem in the study area. TFT is by far more sensitive than MM, FEC, KK, and DWMM techniques.
Audience Academic
Author Aemero, Mulugeta
Addisu, Ayenew
Tegegne, Yalewayker
Sisay, Tekeba
Zeleke, Ayalew Jejaw
Derso, Adane
Birhanie, Meseret
AuthorAffiliation 2 Institute of Biotechnology, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia
1 Department of Medical Parasitology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: 2 Institute of Biotechnology, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia
– name: 1 Department of Medical Parasitology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Ayalew Jejaw
  orcidid: 0000-0002-9640-4784
  surname: Zeleke
  fullname: Zeleke, Ayalew Jejaw
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Ayenew
  orcidid: 0000-0001-9339-005X
  surname: Addisu
  fullname: Addisu, Ayenew
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Adane
  orcidid: 0000-0001-5961-2405
  surname: Derso
  fullname: Derso, Adane
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Yalewayker
  orcidid: 0000-0001-5306-6175
  surname: Tegegne
  fullname: Tegegne, Yalewayker
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Meseret
  surname: Birhanie
  fullname: Birhanie, Meseret
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Tekeba
  surname: Sisay
  fullname: Sisay, Tekeba
  organization: Institute of BiotechnologyUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Mulugeta
  orcidid: 0000-0002-0225-9361
  surname: Aemero
  fullname: Aemero, Mulugeta
  organization: Department of Medical ParasitologySchool of Biomedical and Laboratory SciencesCollege of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of GondarGondarEthiopiauog.edu.et
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34012680$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNqNkk1vEzEQhleoiJbQG2dkiQsSTeuv9doXpKgNtFIlEJSzNev1Ji67dmpvWiH-PE4TogZBVftga_zMO_b4fVns-eBtUbwm-JiQsjyhmJITISRlDD8rDihWeIwxI3vbPWX7xWFK1zgPJlVZkRfFPuOYUCHxQfFregvdEgYXPAotOg_hx12IPTpzMPMhuYSurJl7d7O0CbUx9OhLhq0fEnIendk6WjTtHCQEvkHfwF9Dzk1DdCYjWXGYWzTp5xABfbWzXOYITYe5CwsHr4rnLXTJHm7WUfH94_Tq9Hx8-fnTxenkcmxEyYYxgFEtkJqblvG6VQ3HQuSQlJxb0QpOSVtKa0rTKE4Ya0VFasqbEpclUUKyUXGx1m0CXOtFdD3EnzqA0_eBEGca4uBMZ7WqBJTWCgZQcSqNqoXFmNNaVlwIrLLWh7XWYln3tjG5ExG6HdHdE-_mehZutST5q_I3jYp3G4EYVk0ddO-SsV0H3oZl0nR1aSIVVU9AqVJclJXI6Ns1OoP8CufbkIubFa4nQgmFK8nx45TkTOCKrKjjf1B5NrZ3JvuvdTm-I_u0hAcV3jxs4rZ7f2yZgaM1YGJIKdp2ixCsV8bXK-PrjfEzTv_CjRvuPZ0v4rr_Jb1fJ82db-DOPV7iN5GXDXw
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1155_2023_9697165
crossref_primary_10_14202_vetworld_2024_99_107
crossref_primary_10_1080_23744235_2023_2294119
crossref_primary_10_1055_s_0044_1788550
crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0303502
crossref_primary_10_1155_2022_1117400
crossref_primary_10_1186_s13071_024_06434_y
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_heliyon_2024_e39936
crossref_primary_10_3389_fcimb_2021_759396
Cites_doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0025003
10.1016/S0022-2836(75)80083-0
10.1186/1756-3305-2-44
10.1371/journal.pmed.1001162
10.1371/journal.pntd.0000331
10.1371/journal.pntd.0003897
10.4314/ejhd.v16i1.9833
10.1155/2014/792536
10.1136/jcp.23.6.545
10.1517/14656566.5.2.263
10.5402/2013/180439
10.1097/QCO.0000000000000395
10.1371/journal.pntd.0000412
10.1016/S0035-9203(98)90795-7
10.1186/s13104-018-3380-z
10.1186/s13104-015-1822-4
10.3347/kjp.2017.55.4.391
10.1017/CBO9780511543470
10.1016/j.ijpara.2008.05.013
10.1007/s00436-011-2385-5
10.1016/j.actatropica.2010.07.001
10.1088/1755-1315/125/1/012040
10.1371/journal.pntd.0004922
10.1371/journal.pntd.0000754
10.1371/journal.pntd.0000366
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Copyright © 2021 Ayalew Jejaw Zeleke et al.
COPYRIGHT 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Copyright © 2021 Ayalew Jejaw Zeleke et al. 2021
Copyright_xml – notice: Copyright © 2021 Ayalew Jejaw Zeleke et al.
– notice: COPYRIGHT 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
– notice: Copyright © 2021 Ayalew Jejaw Zeleke et al. 2021
DBID RHU
RHW
RHX
AAYXX
CITATION
NPM
7X8
7S9
L.6
5PM
DOA
DOI 10.1155/2021/6682330
DatabaseName Hindawi Publishing Complete
Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals
Hindawi Publishing Open Access
CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
AGRICOLA
AGRICOLA - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
AGRICOLA
AGRICOLA - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE - Academic

PubMed


CrossRef
AGRICOLA

Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: RHX
  name: Hindawi Publishing Open Access
  url: http://www.hindawi.com/journals/
  sourceTypes: Publisher
– sequence: 2
  dbid: DOA
  name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  url: https://www.doaj.org/
  sourceTypes: Open Website
– sequence: 3
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Zoology
Public Health
EISSN 2090-0031
Editor Silveira, José F.
Editor_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: José F.
  surname: Silveira
  fullname: Silveira, José F.
EndPage 7
ExternalDocumentID oai_doaj_org_article_976a5ee63aa7428c9b6e0042b8746609
PMC8102123
A696907840
A684360710
34012680
10_1155_2021_6682330
Genre Journal Article
GeographicLocations Ethiopia
GeographicLocations_xml – name: Ethiopia
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: University of Gondar
GroupedDBID ---
188
4.4
5VS
AAFWJ
AAJEY
ABDBF
ACGFO
ADBBV
ADRAZ
AEGXH
AFPKN
AINHJ
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AOIJS
BAWUL
BCNDV
DIK
E3Z
EBD
EBS
ECGQY
ESX
F5P
GROUPED_DOAJ
GX1
HYE
IAO
IEA
IFM
IHR
ITC
KQ8
M48
M~E
O5R
OK1
RHU
RHW
RHX
RNS
RPM
TR2
TUS
0R~
24P
AAHBH
AAYXX
ACCMX
ACUHS
CITATION
H13
PGMZT
2UF
C1A
CEFSP
CNMHZ
EJD
IL9
NPM
O5S
UZ5
7X8
AAMMB
AEFGJ
AGXDD
AIDQK
AIDYY
7S9
L.6
5PM
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c653t-aac9fa1b4cf34bf9d4066c9f8844e6f6421f58ec5cd94133f671b24d505519683
IEDL.DBID M48
ISSN 2090-0023
2090-0031
IngestDate Wed Aug 27 01:31:51 EDT 2025
Thu Aug 21 18:06:28 EDT 2025
Fri Sep 05 04:44:51 EDT 2025
Fri Sep 05 09:33:09 EDT 2025
Wed Mar 19 02:06:01 EDT 2025
Wed Mar 19 02:05:49 EDT 2025
Sat Mar 08 18:51:22 EST 2025
Sat Mar 08 18:50:43 EST 2025
Wed Feb 19 02:25:35 EST 2025
Tue Jul 01 03:17:31 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:01:39 EDT 2025
Sun Jun 02 19:17:38 EDT 2024
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Language English
License This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Copyright © 2021 Ayalew Jejaw Zeleke et al.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c653t-aac9fa1b4cf34bf9d4066c9f8844e6f6421f58ec5cd94133f671b24d505519683
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Academic Editor: José F. Silveira
ORCID 0000-0001-5961-2405
0000-0002-0225-9361
0000-0001-9339-005X
0000-0002-9640-4784
0000-0001-5306-6175
OpenAccessLink http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.1155/2021/6682330
PMID 34012680
PQID 2529946576
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 7
ParticipantIDs doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_976a5ee63aa7428c9b6e0042b8746609
pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8102123
proquest_miscellaneous_2551918929
proquest_miscellaneous_2529946576
gale_infotracmisc_A696907840
gale_infotracmisc_A684360710
gale_infotracacademiconefile_A696907840
gale_infotracacademiconefile_A684360710
pubmed_primary_34012680
crossref_primary_10_1155_2021_6682330
crossref_citationtrail_10_1155_2021_6682330
hindawi_primary_10_1155_2021_6682330
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2021-00-00
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2021-01-01
PublicationDate_xml – year: 2021
  text: 2021-00-00
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle Journal of parasitology research
PublicationTitleAlternate J Parasitol Res
PublicationYear 2021
Publisher Hindawi
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Wiley
Publisher_xml – name: Hindawi
– name: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
– name: Wiley
References 22
Organization WH (28) 2004
24
26
M. D. Lim (18) 2018
29
DG A (23) 2001
30
31
10
11
12
13
35
14
K. A. G. Childers (3) 2014
15
16
17
F. Demissie (25) 2008; 18
Schistosomiasis WECotCo, Organization WH (21) 2002
M. J. van der Werf (34) 2001
1
2
4
5
6
Organization WH (27) 2019
7
8
9
K. Parameshwarappa (32) 2012; 6
C. Fitriani (33) 2018
20
CAC (19) 2008
References_xml – ident: 10
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025003
– volume-title: Summery and statistical report of the 2007 population and housing census Addis Abeba
  year: 2008
  ident: 19
– ident: 20
  doi: 10.1016/S0022-2836(75)80083-0
– volume-title: Diagnostic tools for soil-transmitted helminths control and elimination programs: a pathway for diagnostic product development
  year: 2018
  ident: 18
– ident: 7
  doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-2-44
– volume-title: Bench Aids for the Diagnosis of Intestinal Parasites
  year: 2019
  ident: 27
– ident: 8
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001162
– volume: 18
  issue: 2
  year: 2008
  ident: 25
  article-title: Hookworm species distribution among school children in Asendabo town, Jimma Zone, South West Ethiopia
  publication-title: Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences
– ident: 9
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000331
– volume-title: Prevention and Control of Schistosomiasis and Soil-Transmitted Helminthiasis: World Health Organization/Unicef Joint Statement
  year: 2004
  ident: 28
– ident: 35
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003897
– ident: 24
  doi: 10.4314/ejhd.v16i1.9833
– ident: 26
  doi: 10.1155/2014/792536
– ident: 17
  doi: 10.1136/jcp.23.6.545
– volume-title: Practical Statistics for Medical Research
  year: 2001
  ident: 23
– volume-title: Prevention and control of schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiasis: report of a WHO expert committee
  year: 2002
  ident: 21
– ident: 1
  doi: 10.1517/14656566.5.2.263
– volume: 6
  issue: 7
  year: 2012
  ident: 32
  article-title: The prevalence of intestinal parasitic infestations and the evaluation of different concentration techniques of the stool examination
  publication-title: Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research
– ident: 31
  doi: 10.5402/2013/180439
– ident: 11
  doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000395
– ident: 2
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000412
– ident: 5
  doi: 10.1016/S0035-9203(98)90795-7
– ident: 29
  doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3380-z
– ident: 30
  doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1822-4
– ident: 13
  doi: 10.3347/kjp.2017.55.4.391
– ident: 14
  doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511543470
– ident: 6
  doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2008.05.013
– ident: 22
  doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2385-5
– ident: 12
  doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2010.07.001
– volume-title: Morbidity and infection with schistosomes or soil-transmitted helminths
  year: 2001
  ident: 34
– volume-title: The accuracy of formol-ether concentration in diagnosing soiltransmitted helminths in elementary school 27 Peusangan in Bireuen
  year: 2018
  ident: 33
  doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/125/1/012040
– ident: 4
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004922
– ident: 15
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000754
– ident: 16
  doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000366
– volume-title: A survey of the prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites and associated risk factors in children in a rural city of the Dominican Republic: Virginia Tech
  year: 2014
  ident: 3
SSID ssj0000389571
Score 2.2262108
Snippet Background. Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance...
Inappropriate diagnosis could intimidate the prevention and control of hookworm infection. Thus, this study was aimed at evaluating the performance of hookworm...
SourceID doaj
pubmedcentral
proquest
gale
pubmed
crossref
hindawi
SourceType Open Website
Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage 1
SubjectTerms Care and treatment
computer software
cross-sectional studies
Cultures (Biology)
Diagnosis
Distribution
Ethiopia
Evaluation
Hookworm disease
hookworms
Infection control
Methods
Microscope and microscopy
microscopy
Molecular diagnostic techniques
parasitology
public health
reference standards
Risk factors
SummonAdditionalLinks – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
  dbid: DOA
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwELZQpUpcEFAegYJcqYgDRG3iR5zjQrdacUAIWqniYjmOrQaVpCJb9cCfZ8bOhk1Vuheu8cSJPWPPN9b4G0L2Re24USJPayRu5bXwqXKVByCXGZ-VhShMyLb4LBen_NOZOFsr9YU5YZEeOE7cAbhLI5yTzBiI4pQtK-nQ0ipVcCnj1T3weWvBVNiDwQ-LEG1BI16dztkq610IDPizAylVzjD5ec0fBdr-cXPePsew-Lq5DXzezKFcc0rHD8mDAU3SWRzFI3LPtY_J9vcunJXvkN_zkcubdp4uAFBfA0alRzG_runpyYrCtad40YR-iTSrPW1aeoThMp1fNKanpq3pN9P-MPAuVvqwIAI9Anqks5_I-Uy_Osxsfk8xgb67bMwTcno8P_m4SIdqC6mVgi1TY2zpTVZx6xmvfFmDq5fwSCnOnfR4IdYL5aywdQmej3lZZFUO2j0E0FVKxZ6SrbZr3XNCK1A5aIqXGZLjeG8UgDjBa2lyCfuBSMi71ZxrO1CRY0WMCx1CEiE0akgPGkrIm1H6MlJw_EPuA6pvlEHi7PAAzEkP5qQ3mVNC3qLyNS5v-CVrhlsKMDAkytIzqThDTr7DzZIlnjxAAJ2Q3YkkLGA76ejW5r9v7w92uGH0eysj1dgD5s61rrvqdS4AcnAJgeVdMqDDTAFWTsizaNjj1xiE4LlU8IViYvKTiZ62tM15YCpXWDg-Zy_-h2Zekvs43nj8tUu2lr-u3CsAhMvqdVj7fwBtqVX3
  priority: 102
  providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals
– databaseName: Hindawi Publishing Open Access
  dbid: RHX
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1Nb9QwELVopUpcEN-EFmSkIg4QsfFX7ONCt1pxQAhaacXFchxbDSpJ1WzVA3-emSQbSCmUY5KxE2fG8XvO-JmQfVkG4bRkaYnCraKUMdWhiADkMhczk8vcddkWH9XyWHxYydUgktT--QsfRjuk59lbpTQD6r1FtiDAkJQvV-NUCmrEyY5asZnBddKMb1LcrxSfDD6dRv_4Jd45QQ58WV2HNK8mTP42Ah3eJXcG6Ejnva_vkVuhvk92vjbdxPgD8mMxCnfTJtIloOdLAKT0oE-mq1p6tNFrbSmuKqGfek3VllY1PUBuTBenlWupq0v6xdXfHJTFbT08mECNABXp_DsKPNPPAdOY31DMlm_OKveQHB8ujt4v02FrhdQrydepc95ElxXCRy6KaEoY1xWc0lqIoCKufo1SBy99aWCY41HlWcHAlTNAWEZp_ohs100dnhBagH-1N8JkqIQTo9OA2KQolWMKOr9MyOvNO7d-0B3H7S9Obcc_pLToITt4KCEvR-uzXm_jL3bv0H2jDapkdycgcuzQ6SxALSdDUNy5HGiWN4UK-JUqdC6UmpmEvELnW-zL8EjeDUsSoGGoimXnSguOAnyzmy0NTjMAW07I3sQSequfVHTt5V-l94c4vKH1LzZBarEGTJSrQ3PRWiYBXwgFLPJfNuDDTAMwTsjjPrDHu3Hg20xpuEM-CfnJi55eqauTTpZc4y7xjD_9vybsktt42M9m7ZHt9flFeAb4bl0873r3T8YtRBg
  priority: 102
  providerName: Hindawi Publishing
Title Evaluation of Hookworm Diagnosis Techniques from Patients in Debre Elias and Sanja Districts of the Amhara Region, Ethiopia
URI https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6682330
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34012680
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2529946576
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2551918929
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8102123
https://doaj.org/article/976a5ee63aa7428c9b6e0042b8746609
Volume 2021
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV3fb9MwELbG0CReEL8pjMlIQzxAoElsx35AqLCOCgmExipVvESOY7NMXTKaTgPxz3PnJIVMhfGSh-TixL6z7zvr_B0huzy3TEseBTkSt7Kcu0DazAGQC7ULVcIT7bMtPorJlL2f8dkG6aqNtgNYrw3tsJ7UdDF_8f3bj9cw4V_5Cc85xu_hSyFkBLH5FXIVfJJA-_7QAn2_JoNf5j76ioYKj1JHcZcFf6GBnn_yNP6rxXrrCMPk82IdGL2YU_mHk9q_Qa636JKOGnO4STZseYtsfan83vlt8nO84vamlaMTANjngFnpXpNvV9T0sKN0rSkePKGfGtrVmhYl3cPwmY7nha6pLnP6WZfHGt7Fyh8GRKBFQJN0dIIc0PTAYqbzc4oJ9dVpoe-Q6f748O0kaKsvBEbweBlobZTTYcaMi1nmVA6uX8AtKRmzwuEBWcelNdzkCjxh7EQSZhFoewggTAkZ3yWbZVXa-4RmYALSKKZCJMtxTksAdZzlQkcC1gc-IM-6MU9NS02OFTLmqQ9ROE9RQ2mroQF5spI-bSg5_iL3BtW3kkEibX-jWnxN23mZAhrT3FoRa51AJGZUJiwuZJlMmBBDNSBPUfkpGiD8ktHtqQXoGBJnpSMhWYwcfcPLJRXuREBAPSDbPUmY0KbX0NrHv9_ebe3wkt4_7ow0xRYwl6601VmdRhwgCBMQaP5LBnQYSsDOA3KvMezV12IIySMh4QtJz-R7A91_UhZHnrlcYiH5KH7wH__2kFzD7jS7Xdtkc7k4s48A_y2zHb9vAtd3s3DHT3O4HkxmvwBzQFU2
linkProvider Scholars Portal
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+Hookworm+Diagnosis+Techniques+from+Patients+in+Debre+Elias+and+Sanja+Districts+of+the+Amhara+Region%2C+Ethiopia&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+parasitology+research&rft.au=Zeleke%2C+Ayalew+Jejaw&rft.au=Addisu%2C+Ayenew&rft.au=Derso%2C+Adane&rft.au=Tegegne%2C+Yalewayker&rft.date=2021&rft.issn=2090-0023&rft.volume=2021&rft.spage=6682330&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155%2F2021%2F6682330&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2090-0023&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2090-0023&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2090-0023&client=summon