Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33818640›Full record

ReviewParasitology research2021

Clinical implications and treatment options of tungiasis in domestic animals.

Francis Mutebi, Jürgen Krücken, Hermann Feldmeier, Georg von Samsom-Himmelstjerna

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Parasitology research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Treatment of Animal Tungiasis: What's New?Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Francis MutebiSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Resources, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Biosecurity, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda. francmutebi10@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3404-0070
Jürgen KrückenInstitute for Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Robert-von-Ostertag-Str. 7-13, 14163, Berlin, Germany.
Hermann FeldmeierInstitute of Microbiology and infectious diseases immunology, Charité University Medicine, Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203, Berlin, Germany.
Georg von Samsom-HimmelstjernaInstitute for Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Robert-von-Ostertag-Str. 7-13, 14163, Berlin, Germany.
Freie Universität Berlin · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEMakerere University · UG

Funding

German Research Foundation (DFG) 405027164; KR 2245/7-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tunga penetrans, Tunga trimamillata and Tunga hexalobulata are the three species of sand fleas which cause tungiasis in domestic animals. Tunga penetrans and T. trimamillata are zoonotic in the tropical and sub-tropical endemic communities of Latin America and Africa. Tungiasis in animals frequently occurs alongside human tungiasis. Currently, most of the attention given to tungiasis is focusing on the human disease, and animal tungiasis is extremely neglected despite its public health and animal health significance. This review highlights recent findings concerning the clinical implications and treatment options but also summarises the occurrence, major features, public health and economic significance of tungiasis in domestic animals. Pigs, dogs, cats and domestic ruminants have been reported to harbour high intensities of sand fleas in endemic communities. High infection intensities cause significant animal morbidity which is often exacerbated by excoriations and secondary bacterial infections which are potentially fatal. In addition to the potential economic losses accruing from tungiasis-related morbidity, infected domestic animals contribute to transmission and persistence of sand fleas and eventually also to severe human disease. Although control of animal tungiasis is possible by adoption of proper husbandry practices, affected communities may not afford the resources required to implement them. Also, there are no widely acceptable and affordable insecticides for treatment of tungiasis in animals. Extension services aiming at increasing awareness on tungiasis and its control should be intensified. Also, available commercial insecticides should be evaluated for therapeutic and prophylactic properties against animal tungiasis.

Indexed as

InsecticidesTungiasisAnimalsAnimals, DomesticCatsDogsMorbiditySwineTungaInsecticidesEctoparasiteMorbidityNeglected tropical diseasePublic healthTunga penetransZoonosis

Identifiers

PMID33818640
OpenAlexW3140445665

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.