Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30867019›Full record

SynthesisParasites & vectors2019

The treatment of sarcoptic mange in wildlife: a systematic review.

Madeleine L Rowe, Pam L Whiteley, Scott Carver

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Parasites & vectors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Sarcoptic Mange in Reintroduced Red Foxes (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Pharmacokinetics and safety of topical fluralaner in koalasInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Epidemiology of sarcoptic mange in free-ranging vicuñas (Vicugna vicugna): a cross-sectional study in Andean highland communities in Peru.Revista brasileira de parasitologia veterinaria = Brazilian journal of veterinary parasitology : Orgao Oficial do Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria · 2024
    Article
  9. Integrating In Vitro and In Silico Approaches to AssessMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Diseases of Iberian ibex (European journal of wildlife research · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Essential Oils againstMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Zoonotic Episodes of Scabies: A Global Overview.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  19. Ivermectin Plasma Concentration in Iberian Ibex (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Madeleine L RoweFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Science, The University of Melbourne, Werribee Campus, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia. mlrowe24@gmail.com.
Pam L WhiteleyFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Science, The University of Melbourne, Werribee Campus, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia.
Scott CarverSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Hobart, Australia.
University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Tasmania · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSarcoptic mange, caused by the Sarcoptes scabiei mite, is an infectious disease of wildlife, domestic animals and humans with international importance. Whilst a variety of treatment and control methods have been investigated in wildlife, the literature is fragmented and lacking consensus. The primary objectives of this review were to synthesise the diverse literature published on the treatment of sarcoptic mange in wildlife from around the world, and to identify the qualities of successful treatment strategies in both captive and free-roaming wildlife.

methodsA systematic search of the electronic databases CAB Direct, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE and Discovery was undertaken. Data pertaining to study design, country, year, species, study size, mange severity, treatment protocol and outcomes were extracted from eligible studies and placed in a table. Following data extraction, a decision tree was used to identify studies suitable for further analysis based on the effectiveness of their treatment protocol, whether they were conducted on captive or non-captive wildlife, and the quality of their post-treatment monitoring period.

resultsTwenty-eight studies met our initial inclusion criteria for data collection. Of these studies, 15 were selected for further analysis following application of the decision tree. This comprised of 9 studies on captive wildlife, 5 studies on free-living wildlife and 1 study involving both captive and free-living wildlife. Ivermectin delivered multiple times via subcutaneous injection at a dose between 200-400 µg/kg was found to be the most common and successfully used treatment, although long-term data on post-release survival and re-infection rates was elusive.

conclusionsTo our knowledge, this review is the first to demonstrate that multiple therapeutic protocols exist for the treatment of sarcoptic mange in wildlife. However, several contemporary treatment options are yet to be formally reported in wildlife, such as the use of isoxazoline chemicals as a one-off treatment. There is also a strong indication for more randomised controlled trials, as well as improved methods of post-treatment monitoring. Advancing this field of knowledge is expected to aid veterinarians, wildlife workers and policy makers with the design and implementation of effective treatment and management strategies for the conservation of wildlife affected by sarcoptic mange.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticAnimals, WildConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansInjections, SubcutaneousInsecticidesIvermectinSarcoptes scabieiScabiesTreatment OutcomeInsecticidesIvermectinControlSarcoptes scabieiSarcoptic mangeTreatmentWildlife

Identifiers

PMID30867019
PMCPMC6416846
OpenAlexW2943733865

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.