ArticleBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud2020
Prevalence of leptospirosis in vaccinated working dogs and humans with occupational risk
Article in Biomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular surveillance of Leptospira infection in domestic dogs in Soledad, Northern Colombia.Veterinary research communications · 2026Article
- Seroprevalence of pathogenic leptospira in domiciled and stray dogs from subtropical Mexico.Veterinary research communications · 2025Article
- One Health Field Approach Applied to Leptospirosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Across Humans, Animals and the Environment.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Seroprevalence of pathogenicFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Review
- Canine Leptospirosis in a Northwestern Region of Colombia: Serological, Molecular and Epidemiological Factors.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Isolation ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Working dogs have been identified as a risk group for developing leptospirosis because they can be infected by Leptospira spp., which can be kept in the renal tubules and interstices for a long time, making them carriers and sources of infection for other hosts, including humans. Objective: To establish the prevalence of Leptospira spp. in vaccinated working dogs and in the occupationally exposed population in six police units in Colombia. Materials and methods: A total of 92 vaccinated dogs (65 males and 27 females) and 69 people from six police units in the municipalities of Manizales, Pereira, Armenia, Ibagué, Tuluá, and Cali were tested. Three structured instruments were applied and blood samples were obtained from people and dogs, which were processed with the microagglutination test (MAT) in 24 serogroups. A clinical examination of the dogs was performed and urine samples were obtained for urine cultures. Results: The seroprevalence of human leptospirosis was 2.9% (n=2) and in dogs, it was 57.61% (n=53). Among the dogs, serogroups L. canicola and L. panama were the most prevalent. Urine cultures were positive in 58.7% (54/92) of the samples. A statistically significant association was found between the age of the dogs (≥10 years; p=0.043) and the location of the police unit (p=0.016) with the urine culture. Conclusion: The epidemiological characteristics of leptospirosis in dogs suggest an endemic presentation of the infection. There is an urgent need to improve current diagnostic methods to investigate canine leptospirosis and differentiate between vaccine and natural infection antibodies.
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.