2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.12.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geometric means provide a biased efficacy result when conducting a faecal egg count reduction test (FECRT)

Abstract: Geometric means provide a biased efficacy result when conducting a faecal egg count reduction test (FECRT). Veterinary Parasitology, 161(1-2). pp. 162-167. AbstractThe process of conducting a faecal egg count reduction test was simulated to examine whether arithmetic or geometric means offer the best estimate of efficacy in a situation where the true efficacy is known. Two components of sample variation were simulated: selecting hosts from the general population which was modelled by the negative binomial dis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
61
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The FECRT can be performed by means of an overall count of strongyle eggs (Strongylida) or individual counts of parasitic genera through fecal culture (MCKENNA, 1997). Albeit very common, there are several limitations inherent to the interactions between host, parasite and the environment (LEVECKE et al, 2012), and there are variations in the calculation formula , in the need for control groups (MCKENNA, 2013(MCKENNA, , 2014, and in use of arithmetic (COLES et al, , 2006 or geometric means (SMOTHERS et al, 1999;DOBSON et al, 2009) in the calculation. According to Falzon et al (2014), the various methods to calculate FECRT are influenced by the level of AHR and if a bias correction is used in the formula, so it is important to analyze each case.…”
Section: Diagnostic Methods Employed In Brazil To Detect Ahr In Smallmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The FECRT can be performed by means of an overall count of strongyle eggs (Strongylida) or individual counts of parasitic genera through fecal culture (MCKENNA, 1997). Albeit very common, there are several limitations inherent to the interactions between host, parasite and the environment (LEVECKE et al, 2012), and there are variations in the calculation formula , in the need for control groups (MCKENNA, 2013(MCKENNA, , 2014, and in use of arithmetic (COLES et al, , 2006 or geometric means (SMOTHERS et al, 1999;DOBSON et al, 2009) in the calculation. According to Falzon et al (2014), the various methods to calculate FECRT are influenced by the level of AHR and if a bias correction is used in the formula, so it is important to analyze each case.…”
Section: Diagnostic Methods Employed In Brazil To Detect Ahr In Smallmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and the choice of constant can effect the results. In addition the use of logarithmic transformation can result in bias when conducting a faecal egg count reduction test (Dobson et al, 2009). The issue of over-dispersion of egg counts between animals can be more rigorously analysed by using appropriate statistical techniques that embrace the skewed statistical distributions observed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, to determine the resistant populations, we followed Dobson et al, 2009 andVercruysse et al, 2002.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The damages these parasites cause include impaired growth, reduction in gain weight or weight loss, reduced milk production and, in more severe cases, death. Heavy reliance on the chemical control of this parasite, allied to the constant observation of its resistance to anthelmintics, represents a serious obstacle to production (WALLER, 1997;GILL, 1999;WOLSTENHOLME et al, 2004;FLEMING et al, 2006;LECOVÁ et al, 2014). An aggravating factor of this situation is the high cost involved in the development of new molecules with anthelmintic activity, which results in low availability of different chemical groups for the treatment of worm infections (PRICHARD, 1994).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation