Burden of scabies in displacement settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis among forcibly displaced populations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: By the end of 2024, an estimated 123.2 million people were forcibly displaced due to conflict and persecution, with 80% residing in low- and middle-income countries. Scabies, a neglected tropical disease affecting around 200 million people globally and causing over 455 million new cases annually, disproportionately affects displaced populations due to overcrowding, poor hygiene, and limited healthcare access. However, global evidence on its prevalence among these groups remains inconsistent. This study aimed to estimate the global pooled prevalence of scabies among forcibly displaced populations. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Epistemonikos, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Embase for studies published up to May 28, 2025, supplemented by hand-searches using Google and Google Scholar to capture any additional relevant studies. Data were extracted using Microsoft Excel 2021 and analyzed with STATA version 17. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only studies that met the predefined inclusion criteria were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed study quality. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled prevalence. Heterogeneity was measured using the Galbraith plot and the I2 statistic, while publication bias with funnel plots and Egger's regression test. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251067217). RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 76,664 participants were included. The global pooled prevalence of scabies was 15% (I2 = 99.87%). Prevalence varies by region, study setting, population group, and data collection method. Prevalence was highest in Asia (25%), followed by Europe (13%) and Africa (7%). Refugees showed the highest prevalence (23%), compared to IDPs (13%), asylum seekers (2%), and refugee-asylum seekers (2%). Among population groups, prevalence was highest in combined adult-child populations (66%), patients (24%), and school-aged children (15%), women and children under 15 years (6%), the general population (2%), and unaccompanied minors (1%). Studies using both clinical exams and Questionnaires reported a higher prevalence (27%) than those using clinical exams alone (14%) and interviews or physical examination only (3% and 2%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Scabies poses a significant health (15%) burden among forcibly displaced populations. Integrated interventions, including screening, treatment, WASH programs, and improved surveillance, are urgently needed to reduce transmission and improve health outcomes in displacement settings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».