Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 Results of point or pooled prevalence estimates (meta-analysis using random effects model) by serological vs non-serological methods for the different orders of potential Trypanosoma cruzi animal reservoirs studied in Colombia

From: Heterogeneity of Trypanosoma cruzi infection rates in vectors and animal reservoirs in Colombia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Order/family/species Diagnostic subgroup No. of studies Potential reservoirs (n) Potential reservoirs (+) Pooled prevalence (%) 95% CI I2 (%) τ 2 P-value
Carnivora Non-serological 11 940 347 17 5–33 96 0.08 <0.01
Family Canidae/Canis lupus familiaris Serological 4 430 196 24 1–64 98 0.17 <0.01
Non-serological 5 257 89 14 1–37 93 0.07 <0.01
Mixed 1 242 62 26 2–31
Family Felidae Non-serological 1 11 0 0 0–15
Chiroptera Non-serological 6 20,267 1010 15 5–29 96 0.04 <0.01
Cingulata Non-serological 1 21 4 19 5–39
Pilosa Non-serological 1 46 0 0 0–4
Didelphimorphia Non-serological 5 310 80 35 16–57 92 0.06 <0.01
Didelphis marsupialis Non-serological 5 161 73 48 26–71 88 0.07 <0.01
Other Didelphis Non-serological 3 148 6 3 0–10 62 0.09 0.07
Primates Non-serological 1 343 53 15 12–19
Rodentia Non-serological 5 799 59 6 2–12 77 0.01 <0.01
Other non-classified species Non-serological 1 10 2 20 1–51
  1. Notes: Non-serological: includes parasitological methods (blood smears hemoculture and xenodiagnostic) and molecular methods (PCR)
  2. Serological: includes ELISA, IFAT or rapid tests based on the whole parasite or recombined antigens; +: positive