Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19389228›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2009

Linkages between animal and human health sentinel data.

Matthew Scotch, Lynda Odofin, Peter Rabinowitz

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Seropositivity for PathogenicTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Zoonotic and vector-borne pathogens in tigers from a wildlife safari park, Italy.International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Matthew Scotch
Lynda Odofin
Peter Rabinowitz

Funding

MEDICAL INFORMATICS RESEARCH TRAINING AT YALET15LM007056 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Mark Bender Gerstein, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 1987 to 2026
$22.2M
Animals as Sentinels of Human Environmental HazardsG08LM007881 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI RABINOWITZ, PETER MACGARR · 2003 to 2005
$447k
Informatics for zoonotic disease surveillance: combining animal and human dataK99LM009825 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI SCOTCH, MATTHEW · 2008 to 2010
$230k
NLM NIH HHS G08 LM007881NLM NIH HHS G08 LM07881NLM NIH HHS K99 LM009825NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007056NLM NIH HHS TI5 LM007056
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn order to identify priorities for building integrated surveillance systems that effectively model and predict human risk of zoonotic diseases, there is a need for improved understanding of the practical options for linking surveillance data of animals and humans. We conducted an analysis of the literature and characterized the linkage between animal and human health data. We discuss the findings in relation to zoonotic surveillance and the linkage of human and animal data.

methodsThe Canary Database, an online bibliographic database of animal-sentinel studies was searched and articles were classified according to four linkage categories.

results465 studies were identified and assigned to linkage categories involving: descriptive, analytic, molecular, or no human outcomes of human and animal health. Descriptive linkage was the most common, whereby both animal and human health outcomes were presented, but without quantitative linkage between the two. Rarely, analytic linkage was utilized in which animal data was used to quantitatively predict human risk. The other two categories included molecular linkage, and no human outcomes, which present health outcomes in animals but not humans. DISCUSSION: We found limited use of animal data to quantitatively predict human risk and listed the methods from the literature that performed analytic linkage. The lack of analytic linkage in the literature might not be solely related to technological barriers including access to electronic database, statistical software packages, and Geographical Information System (GIS). Rather, the problem might be from a lack of understanding by researchers of the importance of animal data as a 'sentinel' for human health. Researchers performing zoonotic surveillance should be aware of the value of animal-sentinel approaches for predicting human risk and consider analytic methods for linking animal and human data. Qualitative work needs to be done in order to examine researchers' decisions in linkage strategies between animal and human data.

Indexed as

ZoonosesAnimalsDatabases, FactualHumansModels, TheoreticalOdds RatioPopulation SurveillancePublic HealthRegression Analysis

Identifiers

PMID19389228
PMCPMC2679002

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.