Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Location of study sites and participating health facilities.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Diagnostic algorithm.

1 Fever on the day of consultation (body temperature measured axillary >37.5°C); fever duration ≥3 days; headache since the start of the fever. 2 IgM lateral flow assay

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics by case definition.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Distribution of individual level risk factors by case definition [1].

1 Type I controls were individuals negative to both serology and culture (n = 305); Type II controls were individuals negative to serology and with a diagnosis other than typhoid (n = 144); Type I cases were individuals with a culture positive result regardless of serological result (n = 174); Type II cases were individuals who had a culture negative but seropositive results (n = 310); 2 Continuous score with values between 0 = Never and 3 = Always. 3 Categorical variable 0 = Sometimes/Never, 1 = Often, 2 = Always. 4 Categorical variable 1 = Less than once a week, 2 = Once a week, 3 = Few times a week, 4 = Every day

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Estimated effect of individual level behavioural risk factors on the odds of typhoid1,2.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Population attributable fraction (PAF) and 95% CI of increased odds of typhoid infection for each behavioural risk factor, by type of setting1.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Population attributable fraction (PAF) and 95% CI of increased odds of typhoid infection for each behavioural risk factor, by island 1.

More »

Table 4 Expand