ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2018
The Certainty of Uncertainty: Potential Sources of Bias and Imprecision in Disease Ecology Studies.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of health risk assessment in Africa's bushmeat trade: Are there any risks assessed?PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of antimicrobial resistant bacteria in free-ranging wild mammals.BMC veterinary research · 2025Pooled it
- Towards an understanding of the avian virome.The Journal of general virology · 2020Pooled it
- Rodent-borne pathogens as economic and zoonotic health threat to livestock farming: a review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- Sunflower as a 'Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Protocol to produce a systematic Arenavirus and Hantavirus host-pathogen database: Project ArHa.Wellcome open research · 2025Article
- The prevalence of rodent-borne zoonotic pathogens in the South Gobi desert region of Mongolia.Infection ecology & epidemiology · 2023Article
- Enhancing convolutional neural network predictions of electrocardiograms with left ventricular dysfunction using a novel sub-waveform representation.Cardiovascular digital health journal · 2022Article
- A Review of Non-Invasive Sampling in Wildlife Disease and Health Research: What's New?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Great future or greedy venture: Precision medicine needs philosophy.Health science reports · 2021Review
- Angiostrongylus vasorum in foxes (International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2021Article
- Systematic Review ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- How sure are you? A web-based application to confront imperfect detection of respiratory pathogens in bighorn sheep.PloS one · 2020Article
- A hierarchical Bayesian approach for handling missing classification data.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- Robustness of Eco-Epidemiological Capture-Recapture Parameter Estimates to Variation in Infection State Uncertainty.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wildlife diseases have important implications for wildlife and human health, the preservation of biodiversity and the resilience of ecosystems. However, understanding disease dynamics and the impacts of pathogens in wild populations is challenging because these complex systems can rarely, if ever, be observed without error. Uncertainty in disease ecology studies is commonly defined in terms of either heterogeneity in detectability (due to variation in the probability of encountering, capturing, or detecting individuals in their natural habitat) or uncertainty in disease state assignment (due to misclassification errors or incomplete information). In reality, however, uncertainty in disease ecology studies extends beyond these components of observation error and can arise from multiple varied processes, each of which can lead to bias and a lack of precision in parameter estimates. Here, we present an inventory of the sources of potential uncertainty in studies that attempt to quantify disease-relevant parameters from wild populations (e.g., prevalence, incidence, transmission rates, force of infection, risk of infection, persistence times, and disease-induced impacts). We show that uncertainty can arise via processes pertaining to aspects of the disease system, the study design, the methods used to study the system, and the state of knowledge of the system, and that uncertainties generated via one process can propagate through to others because of interactions between the numerous biological, methodological and environmental factors at play. We show that many of these sources of uncertainty may not be immediately apparent to researchers (for example, unidentified crypticity among vectors, hosts or pathogens, a mismatch between the temporal scale of sampling and disease dynamics, demographic or social misclassification), and thus have received comparatively little consideration in the literature to date. Finally, we discuss the type of bias or imprecision introduced by these varied sources of uncertainty and briefly present appropriate sampling and analytical methods to account for, or minimise, their influence on estimates of disease-relevant parameters. This review should assist researchers and practitioners to navigate the pitfalls of uncertainty in wildlife disease ecology studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.