ReviewParasitology2020
Detection methods and prevalence of transmission stages of
Review in Parasitology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sensitive Detection of Foodborne Parasitic Larvae Using a Sieving-qPCR Workflow: Application to Angiostrongylus cantonensis.Journal of food science · 2026Article
- [Seroprevalence ofMedecine tropicale et sante internationale · 2025Article
- Toxoplasma Gondii in humans, animals and in the environment in Morocco: a literature review.Gut pathogens · 2024Review
- Protozoan parasites and free-living amoebae contamination in organic leafy green vegetables and strawberries from Spain.Food and waterborne parasitology · 2023Article
- Parallel detection of multiple zoonotic parasites using a real-time fluorogenic loop-mediated isothermal amplification-based quadruple-sample microfluidic chip.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Exploring genetic variability ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Extraction of the DNA ofJournal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 2022Article
- First report demonstrating the presence ofFood and waterborne parasitology · 2022Article
- Contamination of Soil, Water, Fresh Produce, and Bivalve Mollusks withMicroorganisms · 2022Review
- A cloth-based hybridization array system for rapid detection of the food- and waterborne protozoan parasitesFood and waterborne parasitology · 2021Article
- Foodborne Parasitic Diseases in the Neotropics - A Review.Helminthologia · 2021Article
- Detection ofFood and waterborne parasitology · 2021Review
- Detection of human intestinal protozoan parasites in vegetables and fruits: a review.Parasites & vectors · 2020Review
- Update on Giardia: Highlights from the seventh International Giardia and Cryptosporidium Conference.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the ways of human parasitic infection is the accidental ingestion of vegetables contaminated with parasites, which represents a major human health hazard. This non-exhaustive review aims to evaluate studies carried out on five types of vegetables (lettuce, parsley, coriander, carrot and radish) since 2000, particularly the methods used for recovery, concentration, detection and identification of protozoan parasites such as Toxoplasma gondii, Giardia duodenalis and Cryptosporidium spp., and the results of each work. Various studies have determined the presence of pathogenic parasites in fresh vegetables with different rates; this variation in rate depends particularly on the detection method used which is related to each parasite and each vegetable type. The variation in parasitic prevalence in food could be due to different factors such as the geographical location, the size of analysed samples and the methods used for parasite detection.
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.