Back

Child exposure to animal feces and zoonotic pathogens in northwest Ecuador: A mixed-methods study.

Alban, V.; Ballard, A. M.; Jesser, K. J.; Lee, G. O.; Eisenberg, J. N.; Garzon-Chavez, D.; Trueba, G.; Caruso, B. A.; Levy, K.

2025-08-29 public and global health
10.1101/2025.08.28.25334671 medRxiv
Show abstract

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), close cohabitation with animals and limited access to water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure increase the risk of zoonotic enteric pathogen transmission to young children. This mixed-methods study combined (A) microbiological analysis of 120 animal fecal samples, and (B) go-along, semi-structured interviews with 35 mothers of children under two years across urban, intermediate, and rural communities in Ecuador to investigate: (Q1) What zoonotic enteric pathogens are present in animal feces and at what concentrations? (Q2) How are children exposed to animals and their feces? and (Q3) Which animals may serve as key sources of child? Microbiological analysis revealed high prevalence and concentrations of zoonotic pathogens, most commonly E. coli aEPEC (57%), Salmonella sp. (36%), and E. coli STEC (25%), with frequent co-infections (33%) and concentrations (4.97-9.29 log10 gc/g) often exceeding infectious dose thresholds. Qualitative findings showed risks from free-roaming animals, poor feces management, and frequent direct and indirect child-animal contact, often via caregivers and siblings. Triangulation identified chickens and dogs as major exposure sources due to their behaviors, proximity to children, and pathogen carriage. These findings highlight the need for targeted interventions to limit animal roaming, improve feces management, and increase caregiver awareness, while demonstrating the value of mixed-methods approaches to inform context-specific strategies for protecting child health in high-exposure environments.

Published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases (predicted rank #2) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.