Evidence Hub

Global prevalence of chlamydial infections in birds: A systematic review and meta-analysis

P. Sukon, N. H. Nguyen, Picha Kittipreeya, Apitchaya Sara-In, Phatthanaprat Wawilai, Rawikan Inchuai, S. Weerakhun

Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 2021

36 citations

Abstract

Chamydia species are bacterial pathogens that can infect a wide range of animal hosts including humans. In birds, Chlamydia psittaci is a leading cause of chlamydial infections (avian chlamydiosis) and is a zoonotic pathogen causing human psittacosis. The objectives of this study were to estimate the global prevalence of chlamydial infections in birds, to assess heterogeneity of the prevalence for some particular characteristics (continents, bird orders, specimen types, and diagnostic techniques), and to determine the trend of the prevalence over time. The relevant citations on the prevalence of chlamydial infections in birds were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Titles and abstracts of the retrieved citations were screened for possible eligibility. Then, full-texts of eligible articles were assessed for data extraction. A random effects model was used for estimating the global prevalence of chlamydial infections in birds and for all other meta-analyses. Subgroup meta-analysis was used to assess heterogeneity of the prevalence for the characteristics mentioned above. Meta-regression analysis and cumulative meta-analysis were used to determine the trend of the prevalence over time. The quality of each included study was also evaluated. Of 579 citations, 74 studies (a total of 39,225 bird samples from 26 countries, five continents) were included in meta-analysis. Almost all included studies reported birds with C. psittaci infections. The global prevalence of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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