SynthesisOpen veterinary journal2026
Endocrine diseases in Brazilian small-animal hospitals and referral caseloads: A systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions.
Synthesis in Open veterinary journal, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endocrinopathies are common chronic disorders in small-animal practice, and accurate estimation depends on standardized diagnostic criteria and denominator-defined populations. Brazilian epidemiological evidence is mostly drawn from hospital and referral settings, resulting in fragmented coverage, limited generalizability, and marked heterogeneity between studies. Conversely, VetCompass in the United Kingdom integrates standardized primary-care electronic records and supports denominator-based population inference. Searches were updated in January 2026 and covered PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, VETINDEX, LILACS (via BVS-Vet), SciELO, and gray literature (2005-2025). A total of 2,501 records were identified, of which 13 met the eligibility criteria. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and appraised the methodological quality using the JBI checklist. Random-effects meta-analyses of proportions were undertaken where appropriate, with heterogeneity quantified using
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.