Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27973528›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2016

Modelling Vaccination Strategies against Rift Valley Fever in Livestock in Kenya.

John M Gachohi, M Kariuki Njenga, Philip Kitala, Bernard Bett

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Knowledge mapping of risk mitigation measures against vector-borne diseases.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Estimation of Rift Valley fever virus spillover to humans during the Mayotte 2018-2019 epidemic.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

John M GachohiSchool of Public Health, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Juja, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-9854-7490
M Kariuki NjengaKenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Nairobi, Kenya.
Philip KitalaFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Bernard BettInternational Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe impacts of vaccination on the transmission of Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) have not been evaluated. We have developed a RVFV transmission model comprising two hosts-cattle as a separate host and sheep and goats as one combined host (herein after referred to as sheep)-and two vectors-Aedes species (spp) and Culex spp-and used it to predict the impacts of: (1) reactive vaccination implemented at various levels of coverage at pre-determined time points, (2) targeted vaccination involving either of the two host species, and (3) a periodic vaccination implemented biannually or annually before an outbreak. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThe model comprises coupled vector and host modules where the dynamics of vectors and hosts are described using a system of difference equations. Vector populations are structured into egg, larva, pupa and adult stages and the latter stage is further categorized into three infection categories: susceptible, exposed and infectious mosquitoes. The survival rates of the immature stages (egg, larva and pupa) are dependent on rainfall densities extracted from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) for a Rift Valley fever (RVF) endemic site in Kenya over a period of 1827 days. The host populations are structured into four age classes comprising young, weaners, yearlings and adults and four infection categories including susceptible, exposed, infectious, and immune categories. The model reproduces the 2006/2007 RVF outbreak reported in empirical surveys in the target area and other seasonal transmission events that are perceived to occur during the wet seasons. Mass reactive vaccination strategies greatly reduce the potential for a major outbreak. The results also suggest that the effectiveness of vaccination can be enhanced by increasing the vaccination coverage, targeting vaccination on cattle given that this species plays a major role in the transmission of the virus, and using both periodic and reactive vaccination strategies. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Reactive vaccination can be effective in mitigating the impacts of RVF outbreaks but practically, it is not always possible to have this measure implemented satisfactorily due to the rapid onset and evolution of RVF epidemics. This analysis demonstrates that both periodic and reactive vaccination ought to be used strategically to effectively control the disease.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsCattleCattle DiseasesCulexDisease OutbreaksEpidemicsGoat DiseasesGoatsHost SpecificityKenyaModels, BiologicalMosquito VectorsRift Valley FeverRift Valley fever virusSheepViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID27973528
PMCPMC5156372

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.