Evidence Hub

Prevalence, species composition, and associated factors of coccidiosis among domestic ruminants in Ethiopia: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Yihenew Getahun Ambaw, Simegnew Adugna Kallu, Assaye Wollelie Fentie, Teketay Bayleyegn Derso, Animaw Andargie Worku

Veterinary and Animal Science, 2026

Abstract

Coccidiosis is a significant parasitic disease that affects the productivity and health of domestic ruminants worldwide. Although coccidiosis is one of the major causes of economic loss in ruminant farming, there is a lack of comprehensive evidence on the epidemiology of the disease in Ethiopia. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis were designed to comprehensively analyze the pooled prevalence of coccidiosis and associated risk factors with identified Eimeria species in domestic ruminants in Ethiopia. Following the PRISMA guidelines, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to retrieve articles published in Ethiopia between 2000 and 2025. This review identified a total of 31 articles; however, the number of studies increased to 40, as some articles reported multiple species. After heterogeneity assessment, the random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of coccidiosis. The estimated pooled prevalence was 42.4% (95% CI: 35.6, 49.1) among domestic ruminants in Ethiopia. In terms of species, the prevalence was higher in goats, 51.9% (95% CI: 29.1, 74.7) and sheep, 51.1% (95% CI: 35.3, 66.8), compared to cattle, 37.5% (95% CI: 30.5, 44.5). The prevalence of coccidiosis in ruminants showed a minor decreasing temporal trend over time (p = 0.061). Regarding region, the prevalence was higher in Tigray 81.8% (95% CI: 73.1, 90.6), followed by Addis Ababa 53.8% (95% CI: 32.4, 75.3), Oromia…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

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