SynthesisScientific reports2025
Systematic review and meta-regression analysis of the prevalence of tick-borne pathogens in ticks and livestock in Uganda from 1980 to 2024.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tick-borne pathogens (TBPs) cause diseases of significant impact on public health and livestock production in sub-Saharan Africa. In Uganda, livestock production contributes more than 17% of financial share of the agricultural sector. However, this venture is hampered by livestock diseases, especially tick-borne diseases (TBDs). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to estimate the prevalence and distribution of TBPs in order to inform TBD control in Uganda. We retrieved published TBP prevalence articles (n = 6,446) for Uganda (January 1980 - August 2024) from five scientific databases, namely: Scopus, PubMed, Springer Nature, ScienceDirect and Web of Science. Following PRISMA guidelines, 36 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran's Q statistic. The I
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.