Modelling the impact of COVID-19-related control programme interruptions on progress towards the WHO 2030 target for soil-transmitted helminths

  1. Veronica Malizia
  2. Federica Giardina
  3. Carolin Vegvari
  4. Sumali Bajaj
  5. Kevin McRae-McKee
  6. Roy M Anderson
  7. Sake J de Vlas
  8. Luc E Coffeng

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

On 1 April 2020, the WHO recommended an interruption of all activities for the control of neglected tropical diseases, including soil-transmitted helminths (STH), in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper investigates the impact of this disruption on the progress towards the WHO 2030 target for STH.

Methods

We used two stochastic individual-based models to simulate the impact of missing one or more preventive chemotherapy (PC) rounds in different endemicity settings. We also investigated the extent to which this impact can be lessened by mitigation strategies, such as semiannual or community-wide PC.

Results

Both models show that without a mitigation strategy, control programmes will catch up by 2030, assuming that coverage is maintained. The catch-up time can be up to 4.5 y after the start of the interruption. Mitigation strategies may reduce this time by up to 2 y and increase the probability of achieving the 2030 target.

Conclusions

Although a PC interruption will only temporarily impact the progress towards the WHO 2030 target, programmes are encouraged to restart as soon as possible to minimise the impact on morbidity. The implementation of suitable mitigation strategies can turn the interruption into an opportunity to accelerate progress towards reaching the target.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1093/trstmh/traa156
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.01.20220376: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.11.01.20220376v1 on medRxiv