Distribution of correct test responses for individual symptoms, before and after HAT training.

<p>The numbers of people providing an answer for each symptom-association varied between tests. Pre-training (Pre-) test n = 107–113, post-training (Post-) test n = 106–110, post-intervention evaluation (Eval-) test n = 54–55. “Don't know” responses were categorised as incorrect. Fever for 2 days, cough and abdominal pains are not associated with HAT. *McNemar's p-value indicates a significant (p<0.05) increase in correct associations between pre-training and post-intervention evaluation tests.</p

HAT patient screening rates before and after HAT training, by referral route.

<p>PY: Person-years of observation.</p

Source of referral for patients screened at hospital for HAT, by month of screening.

<p>Source of referral for patients screened at hospital for HAT, by month of screening.</p

Proportion of HCWs and facilities who made at least one HAT referral, before and after HAT training.

<p>*An additional 5 HCWs from 4 facilities made HAT referrals after being trained by HCWs who attended the workshop. If only HCWs who were followed-up are considered, the proportion who ever referred for HAT before the training was 25/97 (26.8%) and the proportion who referred in the month before training was 11/97 (11.3%). For facilities, these proportions were 16/49 (32.6%) and 9/49 (18.4%), respectively.</p

Associations between demographic variables and mean test scores.

<p>*For differences by demographic variables in test scores at one time point significant at the 0.05 level, p-values are shown in bold font. Where p-values are not shown (-), numbers were too small for analysis of significance.</p>†<p>Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare mean scores between demographic sub-groups.</p

Numbers and types of peripheral health facilities represented at HAT training and followed-up during the evaluation period.

<p>PHCU = Primary health care unit, the lowest level of healthcare available to communities.</p><p>PHCC = Primary health care centre, the next highest level of care.</p

Screening outcome of new referrals made.

<p>Screening outcome of new referrals made.</p

Mean overall test scores, before and after HAT training.

<p>*In the pre-training test, 10/123 participants did not complete the test, 97/113 test-takers answered the question for all 14 symptoms. In the post-training test, 13/123 did not complete the test, 97/110 answered all 14 symptoms. In the post-intervention evaluation test, 68/123 did not complete the test, 52/55 answered all 14 symptoms. SD = Standard deviation.</p

Characteristics of participants who received HAT training.

<p>*Totals do not always sum to 123, as questionnaire data were missing for several participants who attended training and only some items could be completed on their behalf from administrative records.</p>†<p>5 participants worked at both public and private facilities, but were counted as public facility employees only for this analysis.</p

Numbers of patients in whom new and pre-existing ideas about HAT case detection led to referral after training (n = 54).

<p>*More than one referral rationale could apply to an individual patient.</p