ReviewOpen veterinary journal2024
Recent progress in camel research.
Review in Open veterinary journal, 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.
- Type A and DFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Explainable multi stream deep learning for fine grained camel breed classification using a Novel Arabian and Non Arabian dataset.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Spatial Modularity of Innate Immune Networks Across Bactrian Camel Tissues.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Camelids play an important role in the preservation of ecosystems, biodiversity, food security, economic growth, adaptation to climate change, and cultural and social aspects. Therefore, the United Nations has named 2024 the International Year of Camelids (IYC). Aim: This study aimed to assess the recent progress in camel research and its citation effect as shown in the Scopus database in the IYC. Methods: On March 17, 2024, a literature search was done to discover papers indexed in Scopus Results: Between 1850 and 2024, a total of 15,844 camelid-related papers were published. Approximately 30% of these documents were released within the previous 5 years (2019-2023). Camel research was included into 28 scientific topics. The top five topics were agricultural and biological sciences, medicine, veterinary science, biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology, immunology, and microbiology. The top five authors in camel research were Faye B, Wernery U, Muyldermans S, Kinne J, and Sahani MS. The top five camel research contributors among 159 academic institutions were from King Saud University, King Faisal University, ICAR-National Research Centre on Camel, Bikane, Cairo University, and United Arab Emirates University. Out of 152 nations active in camel research, the top five were the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Undefined, and India. The top five languages were English, French, Chinese, Russian, and German. The camel research was financed by 158 sponsors, with the top five being undefined, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation. Camel papers have been published under 161 source titles. The top five sources were: Journal of Camel Practice and Research, Tropical Animal Health and Production, Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, Veterinary Parasitology, and Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture. Conclusion: Although camelids are understudied in scientific studies, there has been a promising increase in camel research over the past 5 years. Furthermore, the IYC may give a unique opportunity to assist scientific research, particularly in low-income countries with large camelid populations.
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.