ReviewVeterinary world2025
Global prevalence and risk factors of equine infectious anemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Veterinary world, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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 and Aim: Equine infectious anemia (EIA) is a lentiviral disease affecting members of the Equidae family, with global distribution and significant implications for animal health and biosecurity. Despite numerous individual reports, a comprehensive synthesis of its global prevalence and risk factors remains lacking. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the global prevalence of EIA, identify diagnostic trends, and evaluate factors associated with heterogeneity across studies. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in six major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest), yielding 312 records. After Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-guided screening, 29 eligible studies published between 1975 and 2024 were included in the study. Meta-analysis was performed using R Studio (version 4.4.2) employing a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore heterogeneity across host species, continent, diagnostic method, and study period. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots and Egger's test. Results: The global pooled prevalence of EIA was estimated at 20.97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.08-30.85), with substantial heterogeneity (I Conclusion: This study highlights the substantial global burden and diagnostic variability of EIA, emphasizing the need for enhanced surveillance in endemic areas, standardized diagnostic protocols, and strengthened quarantine practices. Expanding serological monitoring in underrepresented regions and integrating climatic and ecological data into control strategies are vital for mitigating EIA transmission risks.
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.