SynthesisVeterinary medicine and science2022
Global prevalence of Trichinella in pigs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global prevalence of Trichinella in pigs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Veterinary medicine and science · 2022Pooled it
- Epidemiology, frost resistance, and emerging species-specific diagnostics for Trichinella nativa: Current evidence and future priorities.Veterinary world · 2026Review
- Molecular diagnosis of Trichinella spp.: current status and future prospects.Parasitology research · 2025Review
- Controlled freezing inactivatesVeterinary world · 2025Article
- Social context influences Toxoplasma gondii and Trichinella spp. infection in Alberta free-roaming wild pigs (Sus scrofa).PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Seroprevalence ofVeterinary sciences · 2023Article
- An Update in Knowledge of Pigs as the Source of Zoonotic Pathogens.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
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
backgroundInvestigating the global epidemiological patterns of Trichinella in pigs is required for accurate recognition and to establishing proper control programmes and preventive measures, as well as to decrease human exposure.
objectivesTo obtain a better understanding of the global prevalence of Trichinella in domestic pigs and factors that might influence the prevalence, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.
methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Multiple databases were used to identify literature published between January 2000 and December 2021, representing studies from 1985 to 2021, on Trichinella prevalence in domestic pigs. Prevalence was calculated on a global and country level, by country Human Development Index (HDI), climate, pig management system, and diagnostic test.
resultsThe global pooled prevalence based on 60 manuscripts representing 32 countries and 65 pig populations was 2.02% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-3.62) and the estimated pooled prevalence in different continents ranged from 0.00% to 11.8%. Trichinella was highest in low HDI countries (21.6%; 95% CI: 4.3-47.2), tropical wet climates (20.9%; 95% CI: 10.3-34.1), and non-intensive pig farming systems (6.1%; 95% CI: 1.0-15.5).
conclusionsWhile there were regional differences in Trichinella prevalence in domestic pigs, these were likely driven by country HDI and pig farming systems versus climatic factors. Increased biosecurity in outdoor pig production systems, focused meat inspections and promoting awareness could potentially decrease risk of infection.
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.