Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31165434›Full record

ArticleTropical animal health and production2019

A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods.

Mylissa Chaouadi, Khaled Harhoura, Miriem Aissi, Houria Zait, Safia Zenia, Fadila Tazerouti

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Potential Hybridization ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison of Liver Condemnation and Bile Microscopy As Tools to EstimateVector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Mylissa ChaouadiLaboratoire de Biodiversité et Environnement: Interactions et Génomes, Faculté des Sciences Biologiques, Université des Sciences et de la Technologie Houari Boumediene, BP 32, El Alia Bab Ezzouar, Alger, Algérie. chaouadi.melissa@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8012-1632
Khaled HarhouraLaboratoire de Santé et Production Animale, Ecole Nationale Supérieure Vétérinaire Rabie Bouchama, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Alger, Algérie.
Miriem AissiLaboratoire de Santé et Production Animale, Ecole Nationale Supérieure Vétérinaire Rabie Bouchama, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Alger, Algérie.
Houria ZaitLaboratoire de Parasitologie et Mycologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Mustapha Pacha, Place du 1er-Mai CP, 16000, Alger, Algérie.
Safia ZeniaLaboratoire de Santé et Production Animale, Ecole Nationale Supérieure Vétérinaire Rabie Bouchama, Rue Issad Abbes, Oued Smar, Alger, Algérie.
Fadila TazeroutiLaboratoire de Biodiversité et Environnement: Interactions et Génomes, Faculté des Sciences Biologiques, Université des Sciences et de la Technologie Houari Boumediene, BP 32, El Alia Bab Ezzouar, Alger, Algérie.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELISA test. Liver and bile of 1400 cattle were examined for the presence of adult and eggs of Fasciola hepatica, respectively. Based on the results obtained by liver and bile examination, a subset of 206 cattle from the 1400 was selected for antibodies detection using the ELISA test. Liver inspection and microscopic bile examination showed prevalences of 2.86% and 5.50%, respectively. The difference between the two methods was highly significant (p < 0.001). The overall prevalence of bovine fasciolosis found by both methods was 6.07%. The disease was more prevalent in females (11.96%) than in males (2.43%), and in older cattle (12.30%) than in younger ones (2.36%). The ELISA test showed some conflicting results: 23.61% of cattle previously diagnosed positive with liver inspection and bile examination were found seronegative, and 3.73% of cattle previously diagnosed negative were found to be seropositive. The sensitivity and specificity of microscopic bile examination were respectively 80% (CI 65.2-89.5%) and 96.7% (CI 95.6-97.5%) as compared with the liver inspection. Likewise, this same method has a sensitivity of 81.36% (CI 69.6-89.3%) and a specificity of 88.97% (CI 82.8-93.1%) as compared with the ELISA test. Our results show that microscopic bile examination is able to detect more infected cattle than liver inspection. In addition to being simple, fast, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific, it is an effective method for the diagnosis of fasciolosis.

Indexed as

AlgeriaAnimalsBileCattleCattle DiseasesEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFasciola hepaticaFascioliasisFemaleLiverMaleOvumPrevalenceRisk FactorsSensitivity and SpecificityBileCattleFasciolosisLiverSerumSlaughterhouses

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.