ArticlePloS one2024
Prevalence and genotypes of Chlamydia psittaci in birds and related workers in three cities of China.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Online parrot trade as a source of psittacosis caused by a novelFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- The re-emergence of psittacosis in China: a scoping review of epidemiology, diagnostics, and One Health priorities.Science in One Health · 2026Review
- Epidemiological characteristics and environmental surveillance of human psittacosis in Lishui City, Zhejiang Province, China (2021-2024).Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Molecular prevalence of Chlamydia spp. in wild birds from Qinghai Lake, China.Irish veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Genetic Characteristics of Avian Chlamydia in Birds in Guangxi, Southwestern China.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- A Case of Psittacosis - Putian City, Fujian Province, China, April 2025.China CDC weekly · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chlamydia psittaci-a zoonotic pathogen in birds-may be transmitted to humans, causing severe respiratory disease. Individuals working in or living near poultry farms are highly susceptible to C. psittaci infection. In this study, we assessed the prevalence and genotypes of C. psittaci in poultries and humans in three cities of China by collecting fecal samples from different poultry species and throat swab samples and serum samples from workers in poultry farms and zoos. These samples were screened by real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR (qPCR) targeting C. psittaci ompA. The positive samples were subjected to PCR amplification and sequencing of ompA. The strains detected in the samples were genotyped on the basis of the phylogenetic analysis of ompA sequences. In total, 3.13% (40/1278) poultry fecal samples were positive in the qPCR assay, whereas 3.82% (6/157) of throat swab samples and 42.59% (46/108) of serum samples from the workers were positive in the qPCR and indirect fluorescent antibody assays, respectively. The strains detected in the 32 poultry samples and 6 human samples were genotyped as type A, indicating that the workers were infected with C. psittaci that originated in poultry birds in farms. Additionally, eight peacocks showed strains with the genotype CPX0308, which was identified in China for the first time. Elucidating the distribution of C. psittaci in animals and poultry-related workers may provide valuable insights for reducing the risk of C. psittaci infection within a population.
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.