ArticleScientific reports2026
Molecular epidemiology and risk factors associated with Babesia bigemina infection in cattle.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bovine babesiosis caused by Babesia bigemina is an important tick-borne disease that affects cattle health and productivity in tropical and subtropical regions. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of B. bigemina in cattle and to identify associated risk factors in three governorates of the Nile Delta region, Egypt. A total of 400 blood samples were collected randomly from cattle and examined using nested PCR assay. The overall prevalence of B. bigemina prevalence was 8% (32/400). The prevalence did not differ significantly according to locality or sex (P > 0.05). However, significant variations were observed in relation to breed, age, season, tick infestation, and management practices. Mixed-breed cattle showed the highest prevalence (11.4%), followed by Friesian (5.2%) and native breeds (1.8%). Older animals (> 4 years) exhibited the highest infection rate (24%). Seasonal variation indicated that the highest prevalence occurred during summer (13.6%). Management-related factors also influenced infection rates; cattle receiving regular antiprotozoal treatment had a lower prevalence (2.4%) compared with untreated animals (11%). Tick-infested cattle showed higher infection rates (9.8%) compared with non-infested animals (3.5%), while the absence of acaricide application was associated with increased infection risk. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified mixed breed OR = 6.96; 95% CI: 2.08-60.48), age over 4 years (OR = 7.01; 95% CI: 2.07-23.73), summer season (OR = 4.16; 95% CI: 1.10-15.71), lack of antiprotozoal drug use (OR = 6.04; 95% CI: 1.28-28.44), tick infestation (OR = 3.16; 95% CI: 1.09-10.23), and absence of acaricide application (OR = 2.37; 95% CI: 1.28-6.32) as significant predictors of infection. These findings highlight the important role of vector control and proper management practices in reducing the burden of bovine babesiosis. Continuous surveillance and integrated tick control strategies are essential for improving cattle health and productivity in endemic areas.
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.