Background

Improved sanitation has been associated with improved child growth in observational studies, but multiple randomized trials that delivered improved sanitation found no effect on child growth. We assessed to what extent differences in the effect estimated in the two study designs (the effect of treatment in observational studies and the effect of treatment assignment in trials) could explain the contradictory results.

Methods

We used parametric g-computation in five prospective studies (n = 21 524) and 59 cross-sectional Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS; n = 158 439). We compared the average treatment effect (ATE) for improved sanitation on mean length-for-age z-score (LAZ) among children aged <2 years to population intervention effects (PIEs), which are the observational analogue of the effect estimated in trials in which some participants are already exposed.

Results

The ATE was >0.15 z-scores, a clinically meaningful difference, in most prospective studies but in <20% of DHS surveys. The PIE was always smaller than the ATE, and the magnitude of difference depended on the baseline prevalence of the improved sanitation. Interventions with suboptimal coverage and interventions delivered in populations with higher mean LAZ had a smaller effect on population-level LAZ.

Conclusions

Estimates of PIEs corresponding to anticipated trial results were often smaller than clinically meaningful effects. Incongruence between observational associations and null trial results may in part be explained by expected differences between the effects estimated. Using observational ATEs to set expectations for trials may overestimate the impact that sanitation interventions can achieve. PIEs predict realistic effects and should be more routinely estimated.

Children in low-resource settings carry enteric pathogens asymptomatically and are frequently treated with antibiotics, resulting in opportunities for pathogens to be exposed to antibiotics when not the target of treatment (i.e., bystander exposure). We quantified the frequency of bystander antibiotic exposures for enteric pathogens and estimated associations with resistance among children in eight low-resource settings. We analyzed 15,697 antibiotic courses from 1,715 children aged 0 to 2 y from the MAL-ED birth cohort. We calculated the incidence of bystander exposures and attributed exposures to respiratory and diarrheal illnesses. We associated bystander exposure with phenotypic susceptibility of E. coli isolates in the 30 d following exposure and at the level of the study site. There were 744.1 subclinical pathogen exposures to antibiotics per 100 child-years. Enteroaggregative Escherichia coli was the most frequently exposed pathogen, with 229.6 exposures per 100 child-years. Almost all antibiotic exposures for Campylobacter (98.8%), enterotoxigenic E. coli (95.6%), and typical enteropathogenic E. coli (99.4%), and the majority for Shigella (77.6%), occurred when the pathogens were not the target of treatment. Respiratory infections accounted for half (49.9%) and diarrheal illnesses accounted for one-fourth (24.6%) of subclinical enteric bacteria exposures to antibiotics. Bystander exposure of E. coli to class-specific antibiotics was associated with the prevalence of phenotypic resistance at the community level. Antimicrobial stewardship and illness-prevention interventions among children in low-resource settings would have a large ancillary benefit of reducing bystander selection that may contribute to antimicrobial resistance.