Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14561305›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2003

Prevalence of scrapie infection in Great Britain: interpreting the results of the 1997-1998 abattoir survey.

Simon Gubbins, Marion M Simmons, Kumar Sivam, Cerian R Webb, Linda J Hoinville

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simon GubbinsCentre for Epidemiology and Risk Analysis, Veterinary Laboratories Agency, New Haw, Addlestone KT15 3NB, UK. s.gubbins@vla.defra.gsi.gov.uk
Marion M Simmons
Kumar Sivam
Cerian R Webb
Linda J Hoinville
Veterinary Medicines Directorate · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An accurate estimate of the prevalence of scrapie infection in the Great Britain (GB) sheep flock is essential when assessing any potential risk to human health through exposure to sheep transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). One method for assessing the prevalence is to sample sheep intended for human consumption using a diagnostic test capable of detecting infected animals prior to the onset of clinical signs. An abattoir survey conducted in Great Britain in 1997-1998 tested brain samples from 2809 apparently healthy sheep of which none was found to be positive for scrapie by histopathology or immunohistochemistry (IHC) although 10 were positive for scrapie-associated fibrils (SAF). Subsequently, the tonsils from a subset of the animals sampled were examined using IHC, one of which tested positive. To interpret these results we use a likelihood-based approach, which accounts for the variation in the prevalence of infection with age and test sensitivity and specificity with stage of infection. Combining the results for all of the diagnostic tests yields an estimate of the prevalence of scrapie infection in the GB sheep flock of 0.22% (95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.97%). Moreover, our analysis suggests that all of the diagnostic tests used are very specific (greater than 99%). Indeed, only SAF detection yields a specificity estimate of less than 100%, which helps to account for the high number of samples found to be positive for SAF.

Indexed as

AbattoirsAge FactorsAnimalsData CollectionLikelihood FunctionsPrevalenceScrapieSheepUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID14561305
PMCPMC1691455
OpenAlexW2031423633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.