ArticleTherapeutic advances in infectious disease
Respiratory morbidity in human toxocariasis: A scoping review of the literature.
Article in Therapeutic advances in infectious disease. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Human toxocariasis is among the most common helminthic zoonoses worldwide, and larvae traverse the lungs during visceral migration. Respiratory morbidity among diagnosed patients remains poorly characterised, in contrast to the much larger seroepidemiological literature linking Toxocara seropositivity to asthma. Objectives: To map the reported occurrence and clinical spectrum of respiratory disease in confirmed or probable human toxocariasis, and to identify evidence gaps. Eligibility criteria: Case reports, case series, cross-sectional studies, cohorts and trials reporting a respiratory outcome in confirmed or probable toxocariasis. Seroepidemiological association studies, non-Toxocara larva migrans and reports lacking patient-level respiratory data were excluded. Sources of evidence: MEDLINE (via PubMed) and the Web of Science Core Collection, from database inception to 13 June 2026. Charting methods: Two reviewers independently screened and charted data, with disagreements resolved by a third. Findings are presented descriptively, without critical appraisal or meta-analysis. Results: Sixty-five studies reporting 989 patients were included, published 1980 to 2026. Case reports predominated (46/65; 70.8%) and only 1/65 (1.5%) originated from sub-Saharan Africa. Any respiratory symptom was documented in 32/46 case reports (69.6%). Across 12 studies of other designs (593 patients), study-level prevalence ranged from 0.0% to 80.7%, and from 0.0% to 66.7% excluding one cohort reporting a non-disaggregable pooled figure. Imaging was reported in 53/65 studies (81.5%), most often nodules (22/53; 41.5%), interstitial infiltrates (16/53; 30.2%) and ground-glass opacity (14/53; 26.4%). Peripheral eosinophilia was present in 58/65 (89.2%) and explicitly absent in 2/65 (3.1%); lung function was reported in 2/65 (3.1%). Conclusion: Respiratory findings were reported in a substantial share of published cases, spanning imaging abnormalities to eosinophilic lung disease; eosinophilia was frequent but not universal. Because the evidence comprises largely case reports from a respiratory-focused search, these proportions describe what has been reported rather than true frequency. Prospective studies in endemic, resource-limited settings are needed.
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.