Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29145463›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

The chicken or the egg? Exploring bi-directional associations between Newcastle disease vaccination and village chicken flock size in rural Tanzania.

Julia de Bruyn, Peter C Thomson, Brigitte Bagnol, Wende Maulaga, Elpidius Rukambile, Robyn G Alders

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Determinants of diarrhoeal diseases and height-for-ageJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Julia de BruynSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5222-6464
Peter C ThomsonSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Brigitte BagnolSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Wende MaulagaCentral Veterinary Laboratory, Tanzania Veterinary Laboratory Agency, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Elpidius RukambileSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Robyn G AldersSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newcastle disease (ND) is a viral disease of poultry with global importance, responsible for the loss of a potential source of household nutrition and economic livelihood in many low-income food-deficit countries. Periodic outbreaks of this endemic disease result in high mortality amongst free-ranging chicken flocks and may serve as a disincentive for rural households to invest time or resources in poultry-keeping. Sustainable ND control can be achieved through vaccination using a thermotolerant vaccine administered via eyedrop by trained "community vaccinators". This article evaluates the uptake and outcomes of fee-for-service ND vaccination programs in eight rural villages in the semi-arid central zone of Tanzania. It represents part of an interdisciplinary program seeking to address chronic undernutrition in children through improvements to existing poultry and crop systems. Newcastle disease vaccination uptake was found to vary substantially across communities and seasons, with a significantly higher level of vaccination amongst households participating in a longitudinal study of children's growth compared with non-participating households (p = 0.009). Two multivariable model analyses were used to explore associations between vaccination and chicken numbers, allowing for clustered data and socioeconomic and cultural variation amongst the population. Results demonstrated that both (a) households that undertook ND vaccination had a significantly larger chicken flock size in the period between that vaccination campaign and the next compared with those that did not vaccinate (p = 0.018); and (b) households with larger chicken flocks at the time of vaccination were significantly more likely to participate in vaccination programs (p < 0.001). Additionally, households vaccinating in all three vaccination campaigns held over 12 months were identified to have significantly larger chicken flocks at the end of this period (p < 0.001). Opportunities to understand causality and complexity through quantitative analyses are limited, and there is a role for qualitative approaches to explore decisions made by poultry-keeping households and the motivations, challenges and priorities of community vaccinators. Evidence of a bi-directional relationship, however, whereby vaccination leads to greater chicken numbers, and larger flocks are more likely to be vaccinated, offers useful insights into the efficacy of fee-for-service animal health programs. This article concludes that attention should be focused on ways of supporting the participation of vulnerable households in ND vaccination campaigns, and encouraging regular vaccination throughout the year, as a pathway to strengthen food security, promote resilience and contribute to improved human nutrition.

Indexed as

Rural PopulationAnimalsChickensLongitudinal StudiesMultivariate AnalysisNewcastle DiseaseNewcastle disease virusTanzaniaViral VaccinesViral Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID29145463
PMCPMC5690622
OpenAlexW2770643783

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.