Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25353252›Full record

SynthesisEpidemiology and infection2015

Systematic review of surveillance systems and methods for early detection of exotic, new and re-emerging diseases in animal populations.

V Rodríguez-Prieto, M Vicente-Rubiano, A Sánchez-Matamoros, C Rubio-Guerri, M Melero, B Martínez-López, M Martínez-Avilés, L Hoinville, T Vergne, A Comin and 4 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Epidemiology and infection, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Prevalence ofOpen veterinary journal · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors.

V Rodríguez-PrietoVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
M Vicente-RubianoVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
A Sánchez-MatamorosVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
C Rubio-GuerriVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
M MeleroVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
B Martínez-LópezVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
M Martínez-AvilésVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.
L HoinvilleAHVLA Centre for Epidemiology & Risk Analysis,Animal Health Veterinary Laboratories Agency,New Haw,Addlestone,Surrey,UK.
T VergneRVC Veterinary Epidemiology,Economics and Public Health Group,Royal Veterinary College,North Mymms,London,UK.
A CominSVA Department of Disease Control and Epidemiology,National Veterinary Institute,Uppsala,Sweden.
B SchauerFLI Institute of Epidemiology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health,Greifswald - Insel Riems,Germany.
F DóreaSVA Department of Disease Control and Epidemiology,National Veterinary Institute,Uppsala,Sweden.
D U PfeifferRVC Veterinary Epidemiology,Economics and Public Health Group,Royal Veterinary College,North Mymms,London,UK.
J M Sánchez-VizcaínoVISAVET Centre and Animal Health Department,Veterinary School, Complutense University of Madrid,Madrid,Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this globalized world, the spread of new, exotic and re-emerging diseases has become one of the most important threats to animal production and public health. This systematic review analyses conventional and novel early detection methods applied to surveillance. In all, 125 scientific documents were considered for this study. Exotic (n = 49) and re-emerging (n = 27) diseases constituted the most frequently represented health threats. In addition, the majority of studies were related to zoonoses (n = 66). The approaches found in the review could be divided in surveillance modalities, both active (n = 23) and passive (n = 5); and tools and methodologies that support surveillance activities (n = 57). Combinations of surveillance modalities and tools (n = 40) were also found. Risk-based approaches were very common (n = 60), especially in the papers describing tools and methodologies (n = 50). The main applications, benefits and limitations of each approach were extracted from the papers. This information will be very useful for informing the development of tools to facilitate the design of cost-effective surveillance strategies. Thus, the current literature review provides key information about the advantages, disadvantages, limitations and potential application of methodologies for the early detection of new, exotic and re-emerging diseases.

Indexed as

Early DiagnosisEpidemiological MonitoringAnimalsCommunicable Disease ControlCommunicable Diseases, EmergingZoonosesAnimal healthearly detectionemerging diseasesexotic diseasessurveillancesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID25353252
PMCPMC9506978

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.