ReviewParasites & vectors2025
Integrative taxonomy in helminth analysis: protocols and limitations in the twenty-first century.
Review in Parasites & vectors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Into the unknown: a literature review of helminths of amphibians and reptiles in Mesoamerica.Parasites & vectors · 2026Review
- First record ofInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2026Article
- Molecular diagnosis of an immatureIDCases · 2026Article
- Helminth infections in slaughtered livestock of Qazvin Province, Iran: implications for food safety and public health.Irish veterinary journal · 2025Article
- A fresh look at Clestobothrium crassiceps (Rudolphi 1819) Lühe, 1899 (Cestoda: Bothriocephalidea) two centuries later: first complete description and novel observations from its type-host in the NW Mediterranean Sea.Parasitology research · 2025Article
- Hidden in morphology, revealed by molecular genetics: synonymization ofParasitology · 2025Article
- First molecular evidence ofVeterinary world · 2025Article
- Helminth fauna of the monocled cobra (Parasitology · 2025Article
- Emergence of autochthonousFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- First molecular identification 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The term integrative taxonomy was coined in 2005 for the identification of microorganisms using morphological, molecular, pathological and ecological components. Since then, more than 200 scientific articles have been published using this term in the helminthology field in different geographical regions of the world, leading to accurate identifications of specimens and expanding the known biodiversity by describing novel species. Importantly, the responsible use of this approach has led to balanced results in which molecular data do not overshadow morphological, pathological or ecological information. By having different perspectives, new taxonomic situations have arrived including the definition of cryptic diversity, species complex and genotypes. In the present work, we present the main procedures and principles for conducting an integrative taxonomy study of parasitic helminth including collection and preservation of specimens, fixation and staining of worms for light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy, and histopathological, ecological and DNA analysis. This guide is aimed at researchers in their endeavor to analyze helminth parasites collected from wild or domestic animals with examples provided, but the protocols presented herein may be extrapolated for the analysis of helminths collected from other hosts (e.g. human or fish). One important aspect is that the recommendations presented herein derive from the authors' experiences, which will hopefully be of use to the reader.
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.