Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28749769›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2017

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Practices Exposing Humans to Avian Influenza Viruses, Their Prevalence, and Rationale.

Guillaume Fournié, Erling Høg, Tony Barnett, Dirk U Pfeiffer, Punam Mangtani

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Development and application of a real-time RT-PCR assay to rapidly detect H2 subtype avian influenza A viruses.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Avian influenza overview October 2016-August 2017.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2017
    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

5 authors.

Guillaume FourniéVeterinary Epidemiology, Economics and Public Health Group, Department of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, United Kingdom.
Erling HøgDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Tony BarnettDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Dirk U PfeifferSchool of Veterinary Medicine, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Punam MangtaniDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L018993/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Almost all human infections by avian influenza viruses (AIVs) are transmitted from poultry. A systematic review was conducted to identify practices associated with human infections, their prevalence, and rationale. Observational studies were identified through database searches. Meta-analysis produced combined odds ratio estimates. The prevalence of practices and rationales for their adoptions were reported. Of the 48,217 records initially identified, 65 articles were included. Direct and indirect exposures to poultry were associated with infection for all investigated viral subtypes and settings. For the most frequently reported practices, association with infection seemed stronger in markets than households, for sick and dead than healthy poultry, and for H7N9 than H5N1. Practices were often described in general terms and their frequency and intensity of contact were not provided. The prevalence of practices was highly variable across studies, and no studies comprehensively explored reasons behind the adoption of practices. Combining epidemiological and targeted anthropological studies would increase the spectrum and detail of practices that could be investigated and should aim to provide insights into the rationale(s) for their existence. A better understanding of these rationales may help to design more realistic and acceptable preventive public health measures and messages.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza in BirdsPoultryPrevalenceZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID28749769
PMCPMC5544094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.