SynthesisVeterinary medicine and science2025
Global Prevalence and Subtype Distribution of Blastocystis sp. in Rodent Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Veterinary medicine and science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut protist diversity in Eurasian beavers (International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2026Article
- No Trace of Blastocystis Parasite in Bats Caught in the Western and Southwestern Regions of Iran.Veterinary medicine and science · 2026Article
- Assessing Zoonotic Risks ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- High prevalence ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to gather and analyse global data on the prevalence, subtypes (STs) distribution and zoonotic potential of Blastocystis sp. in rodents.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed across multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and ProQuest) for studies published by 23 July 2024. The analysis included 34 studies/78 datasets, comprising 5661 samples from various rodent species across 15 countries. Statistical analyses were performed using comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) software, employing a random-effects model to estimate pooled prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the I
resultsThis review found that 16% (95% CI: 12.6%-20.2%) of rodents worldwide were infected with Blastocystis sp. Voles and squirrels exhibited the highest infection rates at 29.8% (95% CI: 14.7%-51%) and 28.8% (95% CI: 14.4%-49.2%), whereas civets and porcupines had the lowest rates at 9.5% (95% CI: 6.6%-13.6%) and 7.1% (95% CI: 3.3%-14.7%), respectively. The findings indicated that rodents can host various Blastocystis sp. STs (ST1-ST8, ST10, ST13, ST15, ST17), with several (ST1-ST8 and ST10) having zoonotic potential. Globally, ST4, ST5, ST1 and ST3 were the most commonly reported STs in rodents. China and the UK showed the highest ST diversity in rodents, with 10 (ST1-ST7, ST10, ST13, ST17) and 7 (ST1-ST5, ST10, ST15) distinct STs, respectively. ST6, ST7 and ST13 were unique to China, whereas ST15 was found only in the United Kingdom. Squirrels, rats, mice and voles had the highest ST diversity of Blastocystis sp., with 8, 7, 5 and 5 distinct STs, respectively. Notably, ST6 and ST13 were unique to squirrels, ST7 only appeared in rats, and ST15 was found only in voles. Most ST1, ST3-ST5 and ST17 came from Asia. ST6, ST7 and ST13 were also isolated there, whereas ST15 was only found in Europe. ST17 was reported in Africa, ST4 and ST17 in North America, and ST1-ST3 and ST8 in South America.
conclusionsThis review emphasizes the widespread presence of Blastocystis sp. in rodent populations globally, underscoring the need for continued surveillance and research into its zoonotic potential.
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.