ArticleFrontiers in insect science2026
Efficacy of repellents against fleas and ticks: a field trial on free roaming dogs in Mali, West Africa.
Article in Frontiers in insect 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluated the efficacy of repellent products in protecting free‑roaming dogs from flea and tick infestations in Mali, West Africa. The work included a comparative assessment of four commonly marketed collar‑type repelling devices-the ultrasonic collar (TICKLESS Mini Dog), the plastic botanical‑based collar (MEDIDOG Natürliches Zeckenhalsband), the ceramic‑bead collar with microbial coating (Bailey Bijoux), and the natural amber bead collar (PetLove Bernsteinkette)-alongside a biocidal SpotOn formulation (TGF X‑Line SpotOn) containing 9.9% Methods: The evaluation was conducted in two parallel phases. The first trial focused on small dogs (3-6 kg) to allow sensitive comparison across all repellent products. All repellents were tested together, with 10 dogs in the SpotOn group, 6 dogs assigned to each collar‑type treatment, and 10 untreated dogs as controls over an 86‑day study period. A second trial assessed the SpotOn formulation across a broader range of body sizes to determine whether efficacy was maintained when applied at the recommended dose for heavier dogs. In this phase, 40 dogs-20 medium (6-15 kg) and 20 large (15-30 kg)-were enrolled and monitored for reinfestation over the same period. Results: Laboratory assays confirmed that the SpotOn's primary mode of action was repellency rather than insecticidal activity. Overall, the findings demonstrate that regular application of the SpotOn provides effective, long‑lasting protection against fleas and ticks under challenging field conditions, whereas none of the tested collar‑type products showed significant repellent effects.
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.