Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25085078›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2014

Surveillance of low pathogenic novel H7N9 avian influenza in commercial poultry barns: detection of outbreaks and estimation of virus introduction time.

Amy Pinsent, Isobel M Blake, Michael T White, Steven Riley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy PinsentMRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK. amy.pinsent07@imperial.ac.uk.
Isobel M Blake
Michael T White
Steven Riley
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

Ecology of Infectious Diseases (EID)-Immune Landscapes of Human Influenza in HousR01TW008246 · FIC · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CUMMINGS, DEREK A · 2008 to 2011
$1.9M
FIC NIH HHS R01 TW008246FIC NIH HHS R01 TW008246-01Medical Research Council MR/J008761/1Medical Research Council MR/K010174/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 093488/Z/10/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBoth high and low pathogenic subtype A avian influenza remain ongoing threats to the commercial poultry industry globally. The emergence of a novel low pathogenic H7N9 lineage in China presents itself as a new concern to both human and animal health and may necessitate additional surveillance in commercial poultry operations in affected regions.

methodsSampling data was simulated using a mechanistic model of H7N9 influenza transmission within commercial poultry barns together with a stochastic observation process. Parameters were estimated using maximum likelihood. We assessed the probability of detecting an outbreak at time of slaughter using both real-time polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) and a hemagglutinin inhibition assay (HI assay) before considering more intense sampling prior to slaughter. The day of virus introduction and R0 were estimated jointly from weekly flock sampling data. For scenarios where R0 was known, we estimated the day of virus introduction into a barn under different sampling frequencies.

resultsIf birds were tested at time of slaughter, there was a higher probability of detecting evidence of an outbreak using an HI assay compared to rt-PCR, except when the virus was introduced <2 weeks before time of slaughter. Prior to the initial detection of infection N sample = 50 (1%) of birds were sampled on a weekly basis once, but after infection was detected, N sample = 2000 birds (40%) were sampled to estimate both parameters. We accurately estimated the day of virus introduction in isolation with weekly and 2-weekly sampling.

conclusionsA strong sampling effort would be required to infer both the day of virus introduction and R0. Such a sampling effort would not be required to estimate the day of virus introduction alone once R0 was known, and sampling N sample = 50 of birds in the flock on a weekly or 2 weekly basis would be sufficient.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsChinaDisease OutbreaksInfluenza A Virus, H7N9 SubtypeInfluenza in BirdsModels, TheoreticalPopulation SurveillancePoultryPoultry DiseasesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID25085078
PMCPMC4129106
OpenAlexW1969988171

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.