ArticlePublic health challenges2024
Seroprevalence of leptospirosis in a Mexican military population working with animals.
Article in Public health challenges, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of leptospirosis among soldiers: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Seroprevalence of leptospirosis in a Mexican military population working with animals.Public health challenges · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease and a challenge to global public health. There is an occupational risk, particularly in populations with direct contact with animals and in high-humidity environments, which favors the survival of leptospires. This study aimed to determine the seroprevalence of leptospirosis in military personnel working in close contact with animals in México and to describe the available preventive measures and protection levels. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from March to October 2015. Information regarding protective factors in daily activities was gathered through a self-evaluation questionnaire. The serum samples of participants were analyzed through enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) and microscopic agglutination test. Results: Serums were obtained from 65 active military personnel, 56 males (86.2%) and 9 females (13.8%). Out of the total, 54 (83.1%) tested positive for infection by leptospirosis, 49 were males (87.5%) and 5 were females (55.6%). The highest seroprevalence age group was in the ≥45 years group (15, 23.07%), where all tested positive. Regarding military ranks, 100% of the highest hierarchy turned out positive: Officers (4 out of 4) and Chiefs (14 out of 14); and troops resulted in a seroprevalence of 76.5%. Protection equipment available during daily chores included: Overall, 64.6% had gloves and 53.8% had boots; the reported frequency for the use of gloves was 35.3% (46/65) if worn during more than half of the workday, yet 29.2% (19/65) reported never wearing them. Conclusions: This study makes the petition to implement protocols of continuous training regarding labor risks and having an epidemiologic surveillance program for exposed personnel indispensable to improve the health and sanitary conditions of military personnel who work in direct contact with animals.
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.