Evidence Hub

Herd-level seroprevalence, molecular prevalence, and trends of Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) in cattle worldwide: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Konputtar A, Nam NH, Rerkyusuke S, Thamrongyoswittayakul C, Seesupa S, Yossapol M, Sukon P

Veterinary world, 2024

5 citations

Abstract

Background and aim: Cattle are the reservoir host of Coxiella burnetii, a causative agent of Q fever. Pooling herd-level prevalence data from individual studies would help determine the global prevalence of C. burnetii in cattle herds. This study aimed to estimate the global herd-level seroprevalence and molecular prevalence of C. burnetii in cattle, explore sources of heterogeneity, and determine trends and cumulative evidence of the pooled prevalence over time.

Materials and methods: Relevant studies were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science and then screened for possible inclusion. A random-effects model was used for all meta-analyses. Subgroup meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to explore some sources of heterogeneity associated with the pooled prevalence and to determine the trends of C. burnetii in cattle herds over the study years (1961-2020). A cumulative meta-analysis was used to determine the cumulative evidence of the pooled prevalence over the publication years.

Results: Of the 1541 citations, 86 studies with 38,057 cattle herds from 42 countries on six continents were included in the meta-analysis. The global herd-level seroprevalence of C. burnetii in cattle was estimated to be 44.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.9%-51.1%), with high heterogeneity among the included studies. The herd-level seroprevalence was significantly higher in dairy than in beef cattle herds (49.0% [95% CI: 41.9%-56.2%] vs. 14.5% [95% CI: 5.8%-32.1%],…

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