Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28498841›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2017

Awareness and attitudes towards anthrax and meat consumption practices among affected communities in Zambia: A mixed methods approach.

Doreen Chilolo Sitali, Chisoni Mumba, Eystein Skjerve, Oliver Mweemba, Consolata Kabonesa, Mwinyi Omary Mwinyi, Luke Nyakarahuka, John Bwalya Muma

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Doreen Chilolo SitaliDepartment of Disease Control, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6650-4071
Chisoni MumbaDepartment of Disease Control, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Eystein SkjerveDepartment of Food Safety and Infection Biology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Oliver MweembaDepartment of Health Promotion and Education, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Consolata KabonesaDepartment of Gender Studies,Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Mwinyi Omary MwinyiDepartment of Disease Control, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Luke NyakarahukaDepartment of Food Safety and Infection Biology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
John Bwalya MumaDepartment of Disease Control, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
University of Zambia · ZMNorwegian University of Life Sciences · NOMakerere University · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Zambia, human anthrax cases often occur following cases of animal anthrax. Human behaviour has been implicated in this transmission. The objective of the study was to explore human behavioural patterns that may contribute to outbreaks of anthrax among affected communities.

methodsA mixed methods study was conducted in four districts of Zambia from November 2015 to February 2016. A cross sectional survey involving 1,127 respondents, six focus group discussions and seven key informant interviews with professional staff were conducted. Descriptive statistics on socio-demographic characteristics, awareness of anthrax, attitudes towards cattle vaccination and risk factors for anthrax and vaccination practices were run using STATA 12 for analysis.

resultsOverall, 88% of respondents heard about anthrax, 85.1% were aware that anthrax is transmitted by eating infected meat and 64.2% knew that animals and humans can be infected with anthrax. However, qualitative data suggested that awareness of anthrax varied across communities. Qualitative findings also indicated that, in Western and Muchinga provinces, human anthrax was transmitted by eating infected beef and hippo (Hippopotamus amphibious) meat, respectively. Although survey data indicated that 62.2% of respondents vaccinated their animals, qualitative interviews and annual vaccination reports indicated low vaccination rates, which were attributed to inadequate veterinary service provision and logistical challenges. While 82% of respondents indicated that they reported animal deaths to veterinary officers, only 13.5% of respondents buried infected carcasses. Majority (78.1%) of respondents either ate, sold or shared meat from dead animals with other community members. Poverty, lack of access to meat protein and economic reasons were cited as drivers for consuming infected meat.

conclusionsHealth education campaigns must be intensified to reduce the risk of human exposure. Veterinary extension services should be strengthened and cold chain facilities decentralized in order to improve accessibility to anthrax vaccine. It is also important to involve the affected communities and collaborate with other disciplines in order to effectively tackle poverty, improve veterinary services and address inherent meat consumption practices within the communities.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnimalsAnthraxCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFoodborne DiseasesHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28498841
PMCPMC5443538
OpenAlexW2613636021

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.