Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28798293›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Cross-species transmission potential between wild pigs, livestock, poultry, wildlife, and humans: implications for disease risk management in North America.

Ryan S Miller, Steven J Sweeney, Chris Slootmaker, Daniel A Grear, Paul A Di Salvo, Deborah Kiser, Stephanie A Shwiff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing 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

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

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

8 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

7 authors.

Ryan S MillerCenter for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States. Ryan.S.Miller@aphis.usda.gov.ORCID 0000-0003-3892-0251
Steven J SweeneyCenter for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States.
Chris SlootmakerNational Wildlife Research Center, Wildlife Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States.
Daniel A GrearNational Wildlife Health Center, United States Geological Survey, Madison, Wisconsin, United States.
Paul A Di SalvoCenter for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States.
Deborah KiserCenter for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Veterinary Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States.
Stephanie A ShwiffNational Wildlife Research Center, Wildlife Services, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cross-species disease transmission between wildlife, domestic animals and humans is an increasing threat to public and veterinary health. Wild pigs are increasingly a potential veterinary and public health threat. Here we investigate 84 pathogens and the host species most at risk for transmission with wild pigs using a network approach. We assess the risk to agricultural and human health by evaluating the status of these pathogens and the co-occurrence of wild pigs, agriculture and humans. We identified 34 (87%) OIE listed swine pathogens that cause clinical disease in livestock, poultry, wildlife, and humans. On average 73% of bacterial, 39% of viral, and 63% of parasitic pathogens caused clinical disease in other species. Non-porcine livestock in the family Bovidae shared the most pathogens with swine (82%). Only 49% of currently listed OIE domestic swine diseases had published wild pig surveillance studies. The co-occurrence of wild pigs and farms increased annually at a rate of 1.2% with as much as 57% of all farms and 77% of all agricultural animals co-occurring with wild pigs. The increasing co-occurrence of wild pigs with livestock and humans along with the large number of pathogens shared is a growing risk for cross-species transmission.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticAnimals, WildCommunicable Diseases, EmergingHumansLivestockNorth AmericaPoultryPublic HealthRisk ManagementSus scrofaSwineSwine DiseasesZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID28798293
PMCPMC5552697

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.