Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27008629›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Disparities in Beef Tapeworm Identification Rates in the Abattoirs of Gauteng Province, South Africa: A Descriptive Epidemiologic Study.

Daniel Nenene Qekwana, James Wabwire Oguttu, Dries Venter, Agricola Odoi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A Case Report ofInfection and drug resistance · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel Nenene QekwanaSection Veterinary Public Health, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
James Wabwire OguttuDepartment of Agriculture and Animal Health, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Dries VenterGauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Veterinary Services Directory, Pretoria, South Africa.
Agricola OdoiSection Veterinary Public Health, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development · ZAUniversity of Pretoria · ZAUniversity of South Africa · ZAUniversity of Tennessee at Knoxville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBovine Taenia saginata cysticercus infections (also called bovine cysticercosis or beef measles) is usually diagnosed in cattle only during post-mortem meat inspection. The aim of this study was to investigate the identification rates of these infections in and to identify predictors/determinants of variations in the identification rates in abattoirs in Gauteng province, South Africa.

methodsRetrospective data for over 1.4 million cattle carcasses inspected in 26 abattoirs between January 2010 and December 2013 were used for the study. The identification rates (proportion of bovine Taenia saginata cysticercus positive carcasses) were computed and generalized estimating equations used to identify predictors/determinants of identification rates.

resultsThe overall identification rate was 0.70% (95% CI: 0.45, 0.95). Significantly (p< 0.05) lower rates were reported during summer (0.55%) than other seasons. Some geographic areas reported significantly (p<0.05) higher rates than others. The identification rates in high throughput abattoirs was significantly (p<0.05) higher (RR: 9.4; 95% CI: 4.7-19.1) than in low throughput abattoirs. Similarly, the identification rates among animals from feedlots were significantly (p<0.05) higher (RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.7-3.5) than those from non-feedlot sources. No significant (p>0.05) association was identified between identification rates and either the number of meat inspectors per abattoir or the provider of inspection services.

conclusionAlthough no significant association was found between identification rates and provider of inspection services, follow-up studies will need to be done to specifically investigate the potential conflict of interest arising from the fact that abattoir owners hire meat inspection services directly. Capture of abattoir surveillance data needs to include farm address and for each case to be reported separately. Finally, information on the type of identified cysts (alive or calcified) need to be collected to help better estimate risk to consumers. This study provides useful baseline data to guide future studies, surveillance and control efforts.

Indexed as

AbattoirsAnimalsCattleCestodaCestode InfectionsMeat ProductsSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID27008629
PMCPMC4805197
OpenAlexW2304964242

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.