ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
An update on toxocariasis in Reunion Island: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Correction: An update on toxocariasis in reunion island: a retrospective study.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough toxocariasis is ubiquitous, its prevalence varies around the world, and even within the same region. In Reunion Island, its seroprevalence was 93% in the late eighties. This study aimed to update these data and to describe the characteristics of patients who underwent Toxocara canis serology in Reunion Island University Hospital.
methodsThis retrospective study evaluated all patients who underwent T. canis serology in Reunion Island University Hospital in 2021. The seroprevalence was calculated and the characteristics of patients were compared between cases and controls.
resultsA total of 126 patients underwent T. canis serology, mainly for ocular symptoms (47%) and eosinophilia (25%). Of these, 34 (27%) had positive serology and were statistically more likely to be treated (p = 0.07); however, there was no significant difference in improvement between the two groups.
conclusionsGiven the decrease in T. canis seroprevalence over the past 30 years, T. canis serology appears to be regaining interest in helping to diagnose patients suspected of infection.
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.