Evidence Hub

Pediatric Rotavirus A Infection Among 337,019 Participants Within Asia: A Pan‐Asian Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

A. Rabaan, Bello E. Kizito, Abdulsalam Alawfi, Amer M Alshengeti, Amal H. Alfaraj, W. Alfouzan, Haya Altawalah, Dalal M Bashah et al.

Journal of Tropical Medicine, 2026

337,019 participants

Abstract

Background Rotavirus A remains a leading cause of acute gastroenteritis in children under 5 years of age across Asia, despite expanding vaccination programs. This study systematically synthesizes available evidence on rotavirus A detection among pediatric populations in Asian countries. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies reporting laboratory‐confirmed rotavirus A infection among children aged ≤ 5 years in Asia. A total of 111 studies comprising 337,019 tested children were included. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to estimate pooled proportions of rotavirus A positivity among tested children. Between‐study heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic. Results The pooled proportion of rotavirus A–positive cases among tested children in Asia was 24.7% (95% CI: 22.4%–27.1%). Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies (I 2 = 99.42%, p < 0.001), reflecting wide variation in study populations, diagnostic methods, and healthcare settings. Higher test positivity rates were reported in studies from Saudi Arabia (49.3%), Iran (35.2%), Malaysia (33.0%), and India (29.4%), whereas lower proportions were observed in China (13.0%) and Pakistan (18.8%). Diagnostic modality and study design significantly influenced detection rates, with ELISA‐based and cross‐sectional studies reporting higher positivity. Conclusion Approximately one‐quarter of children tested for rotavirus A across Asia were laboratory‐positive, although estimates…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 337,019 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free