Evidence Hub

Prevalence of Schistosoma haematobium and Schistosoma mansoni co-infection in sub-saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Adesida AO, Adejumo OA, Edeki IR, Oyedepo DS, Junaid OA, Akinola TO, Babatunde SH, Oluwagbemiga AT et al.

BMC infectious diseases, 2026

33,121 participants

Abstract

Schistosomiasis remains a significant public health challenge, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). While individual species prevalence is well documented, the global burden of concurrent co-infection remains poorly quantified, despite its significant clinical and therapeutic implications. This study determined the prevalence of Schistosoma haemtobium (Sh) and Schistosoma mansoni (Sm) co-infection in SSA and its variation with age and geographical location. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, African Journal Online, EMBASE and Google Scholar for studies published between 1980 and 2025 reporting Sh and Sm co-infection was conducted. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled prevalence, with subgroup analyses conducted by geographical region and age. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251176915). Twenty-six studies involving 33,121 participants across 11 African countries were included. The overall pooled prevalence of Schistosoma co-infection was 19.1% [95% CI; 12.3%-27.0%, I2= 99.6%, n = 26 studies p < 0.001]. The Western Africa region had the highest pooled prevalence of 26.9% [CI; 14.6%-41.4%, I2 = 99.6%, n = 19 studies, p < 0.001] while the Eastern Africa had the lowest prevalence of 4.8% [CI; 1.7%-9.2%, I2 = 97.2%, n = 5 studies. p < 0.001]. There was a significant difference in the pooled prevalence of Schistosoma co-infection across the various African sub-regions (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 33,121 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