Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33955703›Full record

SynthesisVeterinary medicine and science2022

Bacterial pathogens identified from houseflies in different human and animal settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maropeng C Monyama, Emmanuel T Onyiche, Moeti O Taioe, Jane S Nkhebenyane, Oriel M M Thekisoe

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Veterinary medicine and science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. One Health Perspective ofInternational journal of microbiology · 2022
    Review
  11. A Review of the Antimicrobial Potential ofVeterinary medicine international · 2022
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Maropeng C MonyamaDepartment of Life and Consumer Sciences, University of South Africa, Florida, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-8912-6002
Emmanuel T OnyicheUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Moeti O TaioeEpidemiology, Parasites and Vectors, Agricultural Research Council-Onderstepoort Veterinary Research, Pretoria, South Africa.
Jane S NkhebenyaneDepartment of Life Sciences, Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein, South Africa.
Oriel M M ThekisoeUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Housefly (Musca domestica) is an excellent candidate for the distribution of susceptible and resistant bacterial strains that potentially threaten public health. To date, there is a paucity of information on the global distribution of pathogenic bacteria of medical and veterinary importance from diverse environmental settings. Therefore, this study was undertaken to conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis to estimate occurrence of various bacterial species of medical and veterinary importance harboured by houseflies around the world. Published articles from 1980 to 2020 were retrieved from electronic databases and assessed for eligibility according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Seventy-eight studies were included in the review with only 44 studies being eligible for meta-analysis. Results indicated that eligible studies used in this review were from four continents, i.e., Asia (47.4%) America (23.1%), Africa (20.5%) and Europe (8.9%). The majority of the studies (56.4%) used the culture method for the identification of bacterial pathogens, while 30.7% used both culture and PCR techniques. For meta-analysis, we focused on five pathogenic bacterial species including Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecium, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. High heterogeneity was found among studies investigating different pathogens including E. coli (Q = 10,739.55; I

Indexed as

HousefliesAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaEscherichia coliHumansStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial Agentsanimalsbacteriahouseflieshumans

Identifiers

PMID33955703
PMCPMC8959336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.