Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24586500›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): a systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals.

Ali M Messenger, Amber N Barnes, Gregory C Gray

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Drivers of bat researchers' intent to adopt field hygiene practices.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Molecular Detection and Characterization ofVeterinary medicine international · 2026
    Article
  12. Antimicrobial Resistance: The Answers.British journal of biomedical science · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Modern agriculture and One Health.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Ali M MessengerCollege of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America ; Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Amber N BarnesCollege of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
Gregory C GrayCollege of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America ; Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.

Funding

Prospective Studies of Avian Influenza Transmission in AsiaR01AI068803 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI GRAY, GREGORY CHARLES · 2006 to 2010
$1.7M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI068803
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch regarding zoonotic diseases often focuses on infectious diseases animals have given to humans. However, an increasing number of reports indicate that humans are transmitting pathogens to animals. Recent examples include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of published literature regarding reverse zoonoses and highlight the need for future work in this area.

methodsAn initial broad literature review yielded 4763 titles, of which 4704 were excluded as not meeting inclusion criteria. After careful screening, 56 articles (from 56 countries over three decades) with documented human-to-animal disease transmission were included in this report.

findingsIn these publications, 21 (38%) pathogens studied were bacterial, 16 (29%) were viral, 12 (21%) were parasitic, and 7 (13%) were fungal, other, or involved multiple pathogens. Effected animals included wildlife (n = 28, 50%), livestock (n = 24, 43%), companion animals (n = 13, 23%), and various other animals or animals not explicitly mentioned (n = 2, 4%). Published reports of reverse zoonoses transmission occurred in every continent except Antarctica therefore indicating a worldwide disease threat.

interpretationAs we see a global increase in industrial animal production, the rapid movement of humans and animals, and the habitats of humans and wild animals intertwining with great complexity, the future promises more opportunities for humans to cause reverse zoonoses. Scientific research must be conducted in this area to provide a richer understanding of emerging and reemerging disease threats. As a result, multidisciplinary approaches such as One Health will be needed to mitigate these problems.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticAnimals, WildCommunicable DiseasesHumansInfluenza A virusMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID24586500
PMCPMC3938448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.