Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26195733›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2015

Global trends in infectious diseases at the wildlife-livestock interface.

Anke K Wiethoelter, Daniel Beltrán-Alcrudo, Richard Kock, Siobhan M Mor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
124citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

124 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Novel Wide-Spectrum Virucidal Lipid Nanoparticles.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Systematic mapping of threats to U.S. beef production.Translational animal science · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

64 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

4 authors.

Anke K WiethoelterFaculty of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia;
Daniel Beltrán-AlcrudoFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 00153 Rome, Italy;
Richard KockDepartment of Pathology and Pathobiology, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hertfordshire AL9 7TA, United Kingdom;
Siobhan M MorFaculty of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia; Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia siobhan.mor@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role and significance of wildlife-livestock interfaces in disease ecology has largely been neglected, despite recent interest in animals as origins of emerging diseases in humans. Scoping review methods were applied to objectively assess the relative interest by the scientific community in infectious diseases at interfaces between wildlife and livestock, to characterize animal species and regions involved, as well as to identify trends over time. An extensive literature search combining wildlife, livestock, disease, and geographical search terms yielded 78,861 publications, of which 15,998 were included in the analysis. Publications dated from 1912 to 2013 and showed a continuous increasing trend, including a shift from parasitic to viral diseases over time. In particular there was a significant increase in publications on the artiodactyls-cattle and bird-poultry interface after 2002 and 2003, respectively. These trends could be traced to key disease events that stimulated public interest and research funding. Among the top 10 diseases identified by this review, the majority were zoonoses. Prominent wildlife-livestock interfaces resulted largely from interaction between phylogenetically closely related and/or sympatric species. The bird-poultry interface was the most frequently cited wildlife-livestock interface worldwide with other interfaces reflecting regional circumstances. This review provides the most comprehensive overview of research on infectious diseases at the wildlife-livestock interface to date.

Indexed as

InternationalityAnimalsAnimals, WildCommunicable DiseasesGeographyLivestockPublicationsTime Factorsinfectious diseasesscoping reviewwildlife–livestock interfacezoonoses

Identifiers

PMID26195733
PMCPMC4534210

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.