SynthesisTropical animal health and production2026
Global prevalence of classical swine fever in domestic pigs: an integrative systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Tropical animal health and production, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Worldwide swine industry is seriously threatened by the extremely contagious viral disease known as classical swine fever (CSF), which affects domestic pigs as well as wild boars. A thorough meta-analysis of the prevalence of CSF worldwide shows considerable regional variation, with pooled prevalence estimates that are especially high in places of Asia such as China, Vietnam, though immunization and control measures are implemented. Meta-analysis was conducted using meta-package of R software and prevalence estimates were calculated. Classical swine fever was reported from 40 countries with high event numbers (n = 95; 28,38,350 samples) showed a higher pooled prevalence of 62.35% (95% CI: 15%–24%) with maximum heterogeneity (I2 = 100%) using random effect model. The stratified analysis of epidemiological subgroups, driven by differences in event counts, sample types, diagnostic methods, and geographic regions. Studies with high event numbers reported a markedly higher pooled prevalence (62.43%) and maximum heterogeneity (I2 = 100%) compared to those with low event counts (37.37%, I2 = 98.1%). Sample-wise analysis indicated that serum samples yielded the highest prevalence (86.44%), followed by mixed sample groups (4.34%–21.73%), while tissues showed the lowest (2.5%). Diagnostic method showed ELISA as the most sensitive, reporting the highest prevalence (66.53%), followed by FAT (34.98%), and serum neutralization (22.48%), with RT-PCR producing the lowest (3.08%). Geographically, Asia exhibited the highest prevalence (85.99%), far exceeding Europe (14.99%), Africa (14.97%), Australia (6.08%), and America (1.29%). High heterogeneity persisted across all subgroup analyses, underscoring the variability in CSF prevalence estimates. This comprehensive analysis identifies global CSF hotspots and key diagnostic and methodological gaps, offering clear guidance for targeted vaccination and strengthened molecular epidemiological surveillance to advance coordinated efforts toward CSF eradication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41636914What 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.