Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27388169›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2016

Ticks infesting domestic dogs in the UK: a large-scale surveillance programme.

Swaid Abdullah, Chris Helps, Severine Tasker, Hannah Newbury, Richard Wall

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.1field-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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Knowledge of UK Residents About Importing Puppies from EU Countries.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Metagenomic Analysis of Tick-Borne Viruses Associated WithTransboundary and emerging diseases · 2025
    Article
  11. First molecular sequencing ofOpen veterinary journal · 2024
    Article
  12. Investigation of Tick-Borne Pathogens inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Swaid AbdullahVeterinary Parasitology and Ecology Group, School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. swaid.abdullah@bristol.ac.uk.
Chris HelpsMolecular Diagnostic Unit, Langford Veterinary Services and School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Severine TaskerMolecular Diagnostic Unit, Langford Veterinary Services and School of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Hannah NewburyMSD Animal Health, Walton Manor, Walton, Milton Keynes, UK.
Richard WallVeterinary Parasitology and Ecology Group, School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent changes in the distribution of tick vectors and the incidence of tick-borne disease, driven variously by factors such as climate change, habitat modification, increasing host abundance and the increased movement of people and animals, highlight the importance of ongoing, active surveillance. This paper documents the results of a large-scale survey of tick abundance on dogs presented to veterinary practices in the UK, using a participatory approach that allows relatively cost- and time-effective extensive data collection.

methodsOver a period of 16 weeks (April-July 2015), 1094 veterinary practices were recruited to monitor tick attachment to dogs and provided with a tick collection and submission protocol. Recruitment was encouraged through a national publicity and communication initiative. Participating practices were asked to select five dogs at random each week and undertake a thorough, standardized examination of each dog for ticks. The clinical history and any ticks were then sent to the investigators for identification.

resultsA total of 12,000 and 96 dogs were examined and 6555 tick samples from infested dogs were received. Ixodes ricinus (Linnaeus) was identified on 5265 dogs (89 %), Ixodes hexagonus Leach on 577 (9.8 %) and Ixodes canisuga Johnston on 46 (0.8 %). Ten dogs had Dermacentor reticulatus (Fabricius), one had Dermacentor variabilis (Say), three had Haemaphysalis punctata Canesteini & Fanzago and 13 had Rhipicephalus sanguineus Latreille. 640 ticks were too damaged for identification. All the R. sanguineus and the single D. variabilis were on dogs with a recent history of travel outside the UK. The overall prevalence of tick attachment was 30 % (range 28-32 %). The relatively high prevalence recorded is likely to have been inflated by the method of participant recruitment.

conclusionThe data presented provide a comprehensive spatial understanding of tick distribution and species abundance in the UK against which future changes can be compared. Relative prevalence maps show the highest rates in Scotland and south west England providing a valuable guide to tick-bite risk in the UK.

Indexed as

AnimalsArachnid VectorsDermacentorDog DiseasesDogsFemaleIxodesIxodidaeMaleRhipicephalus sanguineusTick InfestationsTicksUnited KingdomDermacentorIxodesRelative riskRhipicephalusSurveillanceTickVector

Identifiers

PMID27388169
PMCPMC4936200
OpenAlexW2466890574

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.