Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31401955›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2019

Dose-response and transmission: the nexus between reservoir hosts, environment and recipient hosts.

Tamika J Lunn, Olivier Restif, Alison J Peel, Vincent J Munster, Emmie de Wit, Sanna Sokolow, Neeltje van Doremalen, Peter Hudson, Hamish McCallum

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Deliberating the scientific evidence base for influenza transmission to raw milk consumers.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Amphibian infection tolerance to chytridiomycosis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. What is stirring in the reservoir? Modelling mechanisms of henipavirus circulation in fruit bat hosts.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    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

9 authors.

Tamika J LunnEnvironmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia.
Olivier RestifDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES, UK.
Alison J PeelEnvironmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia.
Vincent J MunsterLaboratory of Virology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, Montana, MT 59840, USA.
Emmie de WitLaboratory of Virology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, Montana, MT 59840, USA.
Sanna SokolowStanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Neeltje van DoremalenLaboratory of Virology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, Montana, MT 59840, USA.
Peter HudsonCenter for Infectious Disease Dynamics, Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, PA 16801, USA.
Hamish McCallumEnvironmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dose is the nexus between exposure and all upstream processes that determine pathogen pressure, and is thereby an important element underlying disease dynamics. Understanding the relationship between dose and disease is particularly important in the context of spillover, where nonlinearities in the dose-response could determine the likelihood of transmission. There is a need to explore dose-response models for directly transmitted and zoonotic pathogens, and how these interactions integrate within-host factors to consider, for example, heterogeneity in host susceptibility and dose-dependent antagonism. Here, we review the dose-response literature and discuss the unique role dose-response models have to play in understanding and predicting spillover events. We present a re-analysis of dose-response experiments for two important zoonotic pathogens (Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Nipah virus), to exemplify potential difficulties in differentiating between appropriate models with small exposure experiment datasets. We also discuss the data requirements needed for robust selection between dose-response models. We then suggest how these processes could be modelled to gain more realistic predictions of zoonotic transmission outcomes and highlight the exciting opportunities that could arise with increased collaboration between the virology and epidemiology disciplines. This article is part of the theme issue 'Dynamic and integrative approaches to understanding pathogen spillover'.

Indexed as

EnvironmentHost-Pathogen InteractionsAnimalsAnimals, WildCoronavirus InfectionsDisease ReservoirsHenipavirus InfectionsHumansMiddle East Respiratory Syndrome CoronavirusNipah Virusinfectioninfectious diseasemodellingnonlinearitiesspillovervirus

Identifiers

PMID31401955
PMCPMC6711301

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.