Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42249184›Full record

ReviewParasitology research2026

Reconsidering the risks of Linguatula in Australia: A review of an overlooked introduced parasite.

Shokoofeh Shamsi, Diane P Barton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Parasitology research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shokoofeh ShamsiSchool of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Gulbali Institute, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia. sshamsi@csu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8606-6400
Diane P BartonSchool of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Gulbali Institute, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Linguatula serrata is a globally distributed zoonotic parasite that remains largely overlooked in public health. Although traditionally described as having an indirect life cycle involving carnivorous definitive hosts and herbivorous intermediate hosts, emerging evidence suggests greater complexity in transmission pathways and host associations, with some observations raising the possibility of a direct life cycle. In Australia, L. serrata, likely introduced through domestic animals and livestock during colonisation, is now well established across both introduced and native hosts, indicating sustained transmission at the wildlife-livestock-human interface, although human infection has not been reported. Recognised transmission pathways, via ingestion of eggs from environmental contamination or infective nymphs in raw or undercooked offal, are plausible in Australia. This Perspective synthesises current knowledge of its biology, transmission, and host range, and highlights its role as both a foodborne and environmentally transmitted zoonosis. We argue that the absence of reported human cases likely reflects under-recognition due to non-specific clinical presentation, diagnostic limitations, and limited awareness among health professionals. Together, these observations suggest that L. serrata may be more epidemiologically relevant in Australia than currently recognised and should be reconsidered within Australia's One Health and zoonotic disease frameworks.

Indexed as

PentastomidaZoonosesAnimalsAnimals, WildAustraliaHumansLivestockEmerging infectious diseasesFoodborne parasitic infectionPentastomidaWildlife–livestock interface

Identifiers

PMID42249184
PMCPMC13461942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.