ReviewVeterinary and animal science2026
Seroprevalence of Q-fever among domestic ruminants, humans and ticks in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Veterinary and animal science, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Q fever is a neglected zoonotic disease that poses a significant threat to the economy, animal health, and public health sectors worldwide, particularly in developing countries such as Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, where livestock production is the primary source of livelihood and food security for many communities, the implications of Q fever are particularly concerning. Despite its importance as a health issue for both animals and humans, there is insufficient national-level consolidated evidence regarding the burden of Q fever in ticks, domestic ruminants, and humans in Ethiopia. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to assess the pooled prevalence of Q fever among ticks, ruminants, and humans in the country. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, using common databases such as Scopus, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The literature search was conducted from January 21 to January 30, 2026, to identify articles published in Ethiopia between January 1, 1990, and January 30, 2026. To evaluate the heterogeneity among studies, a random-effects model was employed to explore the pooled prevalence of Q fever in ticks, ruminants, and humans. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were conducted to identify sources of variation between studies. Funnel plots, along with Egger's and Begg's correlation tests, were used to assess publication bias. The overall prevalence of Q fever across ticks, ruminants, and humans was 27.0% (95% CI: 20.0-34.0). The pooled prevalence of Q fever was 9% (95% CI: 2.0-16.0) in ticks, 29% (95% CI: 21.0-38.0) in ruminants, and 20% (95% CI: 5.0-36.0) in humans. The prevalence of Q fever was highest in Eastern Ethiopia at 41.0% (95% CI: 22.0-59.0) and lowest in Southwestern Ethiopia at 7.0% (95% CI: 2.0-13.0). Camels exhibited the highest exposure rate at 48.0% (95% CI: 0.0-1.0), while cattle had the lowest at 12.0% (95% CI: 4.0-21.0). The meta-regression analysis revealed that camel and goat species, along with the geographical regions of Eastern and Central Ethiopia, significantly affected the prevalence of Q fever. The findings highlight that Q fever continues to pose a significant threat to ticks, ruminants, and humans in Ethiopia. Therefore, collaboration among environmental, veterinary, and public health professionals is essential for designing and implementing effective prevention and control programs for Q fever in the context of a One Health approach.
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.