Global seroprevalence of <i>Toxoplasma gondii</i> infection among patients with mental and neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Aim Toxoplasmosis is the most widespread zoonotic disease that affects one‐third of the world's population, and imposes a major public health problem worldwide. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of toxoplasmosis among patients with neuropsychiatric patients. Methods Electronic databases PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Research Gate, and Scopus were thoroughly searched from February to March 2022 to identify all relevant studies. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Newcastle−Ottawa quality scale for case‐control and cross‐sectional studies. Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 12 software. A random effect model was used to compute the global pooled seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infection. Heterogeneity was quantified by using I 2 value. Subgroup analysis was done, and publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and Egger's test. Result Of 1250 studies, 49 containing 21,093 participants and conducted in 18 countries were included. The global pooled seroprevalence of T. gondii IgG antibody was 38.27% (95% CI: 32.04−44.9) among neuropsychiatric patients and 25.31% (95% CI: 21.53−29.08) in healthy controls with substantial heterogeneity of 98.3%. The prevalence of T. gondii IgG antibody was higher in males (17.52%) than in females (12.35%) neuropsychiatric patients. The highest pooled prevalence of T. gondii IgG antibody was in Europe (57%) followed by Africa (45.25%) and Asia (43%). Time based analysis showed the highest pooled prevalence of T. gondii IgG antibody in 2012−2016 (41.16%). The global pooled seroprevalence T. gondii IgM antibody among neuropsychiatric patients and healthy controls was 6.78% (95% CI: 4.87−8.69) and 3.13% (95% CI: 2.02−4.24), respectively. Conclusion The pooled prevalence of chronic and acute T. gondii infection among neuropsychiatric patients was 38.27% and 6.78%, respectively. This showed a high burden of toxoplasmosis among neurological and psychiatric patients and urges routine screening of those patients and providing appropriate treatment. It also indicates the need for different stakeholders to develop targeted prevention and control strategies for T. gondii infection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".