Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 4;100(5):101082. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2021.101082

Table 1.

Description of production systems, chicken types, diagnostic methods, number of studies across continents and their corresponding helminth prevalence rates.

Study characteristics Number of studies
Sample size
Prevalence distribution
Africa Asia Europe North America Mean ± SD Range Prevalence range (%) Mean ± SD Quartile (1st, 2nd, 3rd)
Production system Backyard 71 47 4 0 268 ± 368.8 75-3,773 4.39-100 73.6 ± 24.0 58.7, 81.5, 92.5
Free range 0 0 14 0 447 ± 295.8 60-907 24.0-100 78.4 ± 20.8 58.3, 81.5, 99.2
Deep litter 19 9 5 2 457 ± 802.5 45-3,100 1.0-98.9 43.4 ± 25.9 25.4, 36.6, 58.7
Cage 5 7 3 0 401 ± 976.9 58-500 0-80.0 20.8 ± 25.9 3.0, 11.0, 31.7
Chicken type Broiler 11 9 5 3 509 ± 832.1 90-3,542 0-98.9 39.1 ± 32.7 12.1, 33.2, 63.5
Layer 11 9 15 0 347 ± 375.7 65-1,996 4.0-100 54.5 ± 30.5 26.5, 57.7, 75.4
Indigenous chicken 70 43 1 0 228 ± 186.2 75-889 4.39-100 72.7 ± 24.8 58.3, 81.0, 92.2
Diagnostic method Postmortem examination 69 56 14 2 294 ± 347.1 55-3,100 4.0-100 70.6 ± 26.3 52.4, 75.6, 92.5
Simple flotation technique 20 8 1 1 424 ± 625.8 50-3,773 7.43-100 56.2 ± 24.7 40.3, 58.3, 76.7
McMaster technique 6 7 6 1 515 ± 527.2 70-1,996 7.8-99.2 56.5 ± 26.2 38.3, 56, 72.3