ReviewTropical medicine and health2026
Bacterial communities in Thai ticks: revealing geographical and methodological gaps in surveillance-a 25-year scoping review.
Review in Tropical medicine and health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ticks serve as key vectors for a diverse range of bacterial pathogens that affect humans and animals worldwide. In Thailand, a comprehensive understanding of tick-associated bacterial diversity remains limited. This scoping review synthesises published data on tick-borne bacteria across Thailand from 2001 to 2025, focusing on bacterial diversity, host-vector associations, geographic distribution, and molecular detection methods. Literature searches in NCBI, Embase, and Web of Science identified 402 studies (272 after duplicate removal), of which 39 met the inclusion criteria. Ticks were collected from animals, humans, and the environment across four zoogeographical regions. Rhipicephalus, Haemaphysalis, Dermacentor, and Amblyomma were the most commonly studied genera. Eighteen bacterial genera, including both pathogens and endosymbionts, were identified, with Coxiella-like endosymbionts, Rickettsia, Anaplasma, and Ehrlichia being the predominant genera. Rhipicephalus ticks exhibited the highest bacterial diversity, while Rickettsia spp. were the most frequently detected pathogens. Conventional PCR remained the principal diagnostic method, with limited application of quantitative and metagenomic sequencing approaches. Geographic analysis revealed that most studies were concentrated in the Northern Peninsular and Central Peninsular regions, while the Continental section of the Indo-Chinese Mainland and Korat Plateau zones were under-represented, which may limit the accuracy of regional risk assessments, as surveillance gaps can underestimate both the diversity and prevalence of pathogenic organisms in these areas. This review emphasises the intricate nature of tick-host-pathogen interactions and highlights the importance of implementing standardised genomic surveillance nationwide within a One Health framework. The findings reveal key gaps in current surveillance efforts and advocate for incorporating genomic tick monitoring into Thailand's national One Health strategies to improve zoonotic disease preparedness.
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.