Pet and Stray Dogs’ Contribution to Zoonotic Transmission Pathways: A Bibliometric Review

Based on a large‐scale bibliometric dataset, domestic dogs ( Canis lupus familiaris ) emerge as the most frequently cited host species in the context of zoonoses, being mentioned in at least 10% of publications for nearly a quarter of the pathogens recognized as zoonotic to humans. This review examines the contributions of pet and stray dogs to various zoonotic transmission pathways, highlighting some mismatches between research focus and actual epidemiological risks. Among zoonotic agents associated with dogs, helminths are disproportionately represented in the literature compared to bacteria and viruses. Pet and stray dogs exhibit distinct zoonotic risks due to differences in exposure patterns and human interactions. Stray dogs are frequently involved in environmentally transmitted diseases, particularly soil‐ and water‐borne parasites, due to uncontrolled defecation and opportunistic behavior. Conversely, pet dogs pose greater risks for direct transmission, particularly via bites, close contact infections, and antimicrobial‐resistant bacteria. From a public health perspective, integrating dogs into One Health surveillance frameworks is crucial. Routine genomic monitoring of stray dogs could allow early detection of emerging zoonoses, while large‐scale deworming programs, improved sanitation infrastructures, and responsible pet management would mitigate both environmental and direct transmission risks. Vector‐borne zoonoses require differentiated control measures, including antiparasitic treatments for tick‐ and flea‐borne infections and environmental interventions for mosquito‐ and sandfly‐borne pathogens. This review focuses on pet and stray dogs only, due to the lack of consistent definitions and data availability for other canine categories. Future research should refine ecological and behavioral studies and dog–host interaction analyses to better quantify the zoonotic risks associated with each dog ecotype and guide targeted intervention strategies. This approach enables a more precise zoonotic risk stratification and contributes to effective disease prevention at the human–animal–environment interface.