Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26496893›Full record

SynthesisParasites & vectors2015

Effect of gastro-intestinal nematode infection on sheep performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fabien Mavrot, Hubertus Hertzberg, Paul Torgerson

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Parasites & vectors, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
17.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

96 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 273 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Comparing ShortAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fabien MavrotSection for Veterinary Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. fabien.mavrot@uzh.ch.
Hubertus HertzbergInstitute of Parasitology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Hubertus.Hertzberg@uzh.ch.
Paul TorgersonSection for Veterinary Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. paul.torgerson@access.uzh.ch.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infections are common in domestic sheep and impact directly and indirectly on the health of infected animals as well as on the associated economic production. In this study, we aim at summarizing the current knowledge on the influence of GIN infections on sheep production by conducting a systematic review. A subsequent meta-analysis of relevant studies was performed to provide an estimate of the effect of GIN infections on weight gain, wool production and milk yield.

methodsA literature search was performed on the CAB, Pubmed and Web of Science database for the period 1960-2012. Inclusion criteria were: 1) Measurement of at least one production parameter. 2) Comparison between groups of sheep with different nematode burdens. 3) Same conditions regarding all aspects except parasite burden between groups. 4) Quantitative measurements of one or more production traits.

resultsAltogether, 88 studies describing 218 trials were included in this review. The majority of studies (86%) reported that GIN infections had a negative effect on production but this was reported to be statistically significant in only 43% of the studies. Meta-analysis indicated that performances of sheep infected with nematodes was 85, 90 and 78% of the performance in uninfected individuals for weight gain, wool production and milk yield respectively. Our results suggest a possible reporting bias or small study effect for the estimation of the impact of GIN infections on weight gain. Finally, a general linear model provided an estimate for the decrease in weight gain in relation to the increase in faecal egg count of nematodes.

conclusionThis study underlines the importance of GIN infections for sheep production and highlights the need to improve parasite management in sheep, in particular in face of challenges such as anthelmintic resistance.

Indexed as

Body WeightAnimalsHelminthiasisIntestinal Diseases, ParasiticLactationMilkNematode InfectionsSheepSheep DiseasesWool

Identifiers

PMID26496893
PMCPMC4619485
OpenAlexW1839129633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.