ArticleVeterinary world2024
Feline leptospirosis prevalence worldwide: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic approaches.
Article in Veterinary world, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathogens Associated with Domestic Cats (Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- Clinical and sero-diagnosis of feline leptosprosis in the sleman region of Yogyakarta, Indonesia.Open veterinary journal · 2026Article
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Leptospirosis in felids (domestic and wild cats) presents an ongoing challenge in our understanding. Numerous studies have reported the detection of Materials and Methods: We conducted extensive searches across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, and Google Scholar) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols guidelines. Random-effect meta-analyses were performed using R software version 4.3.0 to estimate pooled prevalence rates. Subgroup meta-analyses were conducted based on continents, diagnostic methods, sample types, and wildcat genera. Results: A total of 71 articles on leptospirosis in domestic cats and 23 articles on leptospirosis in wild cats met the eligibility criteria. Our findings indicated a significantly higher pooled seroprevalence of leptospirosis in domestic cats compared with infection prevalence (9.95% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.60%-12.54%] vs. 4.62% [95% CI, 2.10%-7.83%], p = 0.01). In contrast, no significant difference was observed in pooled seroprevalence and infection prevalence among wild cats (13.38% [95% CI, 6.25%-21.93%] vs. 2.9% [95% CI, 0.00%-18.91%], p = 0.21). A subgroup meta-analysis of domestic cats revealed significant differences in seroprevalence across continents, sample types, and diagnostic methods. On the contrary, wild cats had no significant differences in any of the subgroups. Conclusion:
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.