ArticlePloS one2016
Human Exposure to Anaplasma phagocytophilum in Two Cities of Northwestern Morocco.
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Unveiling the hidden threats: a review of pathogen diversity and public health risks from bats, rodents, and non-human primates in Zambia (1990-2022).Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Cytokine pattern during asymptomatic Anaplasma spp. infections and effect of co-infections by malaria and helminths in schoolchildren of Franceville, southeastern Gabon.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Aetiologies of bacterial tick-borne febrile illnesses in humans in Africa: diagnostic limitations and the need for improvement.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Snakes and Souks: Zoonotic pathogens associated to reptiles in the Marrakech markets, Morocco.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Human-biting ticks and zoonotic tick-borne pathogens in North Africa: diversity, distribution, and trans-Mediterranean public health challenges.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Review
- Ticks and Tick-Borne Pathogens Abound in the Cattle Population of the Rabat-Sale Kenitra Region, Morocco.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Molecular screening of Anaplasmataceae in ticks collected from cattle in Corsica, France.Experimental & applied acarology · 2020Article
- Molecular investigation and phylogeny of species of the Anaplasmataceae infecting animals and ticks in Senegal.Parasites & vectors · 2019Article
- Anaplasma spp. in dogs and owners in north-western Morocco.Parasites & vectors · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaplasma phagocytophilum is an emerging tick-borne zoonosis with extensive increased interest. Epidemiological data are available in several regions of the USA, Europe and Asia in contrast to other parts of the world such as North Africa. Blood samples of 261 healthy individuals divided in two groups i.e., dog handlers and blood donors were analysed. Indirect immunofluorescent assay using a commercial kit was performed to detect specific A. phagocytophilum IgG. Two dilutions were used to assess the prevalence of seroreactive samples. Demographic variables were assessed as potential risk factors using exact logistic regression. Seropositivity rates reached 37% and 27% in dog handlers and 36% and 22% in blood donors. No statistically significant differences were found in the prevalence rates between the two groups. Analysis of risk factors such as gender, age groups, outdoor activities, self-reported previous exposure to ticks, or contact with domestic animals (dogs, cats, ruminants and horses) did not shown any significant difference. A. phagocytophilum exposure was common in both high-risk population and blood donors in Morocco.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.