Cited by 189Toxoplasma gondii Research StudiesHelminth infection and controlParasitic infections in humans and animals

Prevalence of antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and intestinal parasites in stray, farm and household cats in Spain

Miró, Guadalupe, Montoya, Ana, Jiménez, Santos, Frisuelos, Carolina, Mateo, Marta, Fuentes, Isabel·2004·Veterinary Parasitology

Abstract

Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii was tested for in 585 cats in different regions of Spain. Sera were tested by the indirect immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT). Specific antitoxoplasma IgG (IFAT titer>or=1/80) were found in 189 of 585 (32.3%): 117 of 317 (36.9%) stray cats, 16 of 48 (33.3%) farm cats and 56 of 220 (25.5%) household cats. The overall prevalence was significantly higher in stray groups (36.4% of 365) than in household cats (25.5% of 220), higher in adult cats (>6 months old, 36.8% of 443) than in juvenile cats (<6 months old, 13.9% of 101), and higher in male stray cats (45.3% of 128) than in female stray cats (32% of 153). Prevalence of intestinal parasites was also analysed by a routine coprological method in 382 of the 585 cats. Intestinal parasites were found in 107 faecal samples (28%): 76 of 231 (32.9%) stray cats, 14 of 48 (29.2%) farm cats and 17 of 103 (16.5%) household cats. T. gondii oocysts were not found in any faecal samples analysed. The following prevalences of other intestinal parasites were found: Toxocara cati (18.3%), Toxascaris leonina (1.3%), Ancylostoma sp. (1%), Capillaria spp. (1.3%), Aelurostrongylus abstrusus (1%), Taenia like (3.7%), Dipylidium caninum (2.6%) and Cystoisospora spp. (6.3%).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vetpar.2004.08.015

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent studies have proved high prevalence rates, at least for T. cati, also in pet household cats.

    “recent studies have proved high prevalence rates, at least for T. cati, also in pet household cats [182-184]”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miró, G., Montoya, A., Jiménez, S., Frisuelos, C., Mateo, M., & Fuentes, I.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES)
Corresponding author
Miró, Guadalupe
Venue
Veterinary Parasitology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-12
Volume
126
Issue
3
Pages
249-255
ISSN
0304-4017 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967248836
Cited by
189
References
17
Citations by year
2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Veterinary Parasitology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Toxoplasma gondii Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Helminth infection and control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Parasitic infections in humans and animals
Keywords
Toxoplasma gondii, toxoplasmosis, cats, stray cats, seroprevalence, intestinal parasites, Toxocara cati, Toxascaris leonina, Dipylidium caninum, Cystoisospora, Ancylostoma, Aelurostrongylus abstrusus
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Animals, Domestic, Animals, Wild, Antibodies, Protozoan, Cat Diseases, Cats, Feces, Female, Male, Parasite Egg Count, Sex Factors, Spain, Toxoplasma, Toxoplasmosis, Animal, Seroepidemiologic Studies, Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Indirect

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review