Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35059516›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2022

Development of acaricide resistance in tick populations of cattle: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

William Diymba Dzemo, Oriel Thekisoe, Patrick Vudriko

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. In vitro acaricide efficacy evaluation onParasite epidemiology and control · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Copy Number Variation-Based Molecular Sexing ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

William Diymba DzemoDepartment of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Walter Sisulu University, Private Bag X1, Mthatha 5117, South Africa.
Oriel ThekisoeUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North West University, Potchefstroom Campus, Private Bag X6001, Potchefstroom 2520, South Africa.
Patrick VudrikoResearch Center for Tropical Diseases and Vector Control, Department of Veterinary Pharmacy, Clinics and Comparative Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Biosecurity, Makerere University, P.O Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of acaricide resistance in ticks infesting cattle is a major problem in the livestock industry in tropical and subtropical regions worldwide. To determine the current global trends and prevalence of acaricide resistance development (ARD) in tick populations of cattle, a systematic review and meta-analysis with an emphasis on

Indexed as

AcaricidesCattleMeta-analysisPrevalenceResistanceRhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplusTick populations

Identifiers

PMID35059516
PMCPMC8760414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.