Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32040190›Full record

ArticleInternational health2020

A qualitative study of zoonotic risk factors among rural communities in southern China.

Hong-Ying Li, Guang-Jian Zhu, Yun-Zhi Zhang, Li-Biao Zhang, Emily A Hagan, Stephanie Martinez, Aleksei A Chmura, Leilani Francisco, Hina Tai, Maureen Miller and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Coronavirus Disease 2019-COVID-19.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020
    Review
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Hong-Ying LiEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Guang-Jian ZhuEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Yun-Zhi ZhangInstitute of Preventive Medicine, Dali University, Dali, 671000, China.
Li-Biao ZhangGuangdong Institute of Applied Biological Resources, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, #105 Xingang Road West, Guangzhou, 510260, China.
Emily A HaganEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Stephanie MartinezEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Aleksei A ChmuraEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Leilani FranciscoHenry M Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20817, USA.
Hina TaiSchool of Medicine, St. George's University, Great River, NY 11739, USA.
Maureen MillerMailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Peter DaszakEcoHealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
EcoHealth Alliance · USColumbia University · USDali University · CNGuangdong Academy of Sciences · CNHenry M. Jackson Foundation · USSt. George's School · US

Funding

Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus EmergenceR01AI110964 · NIAID · ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE, INC. · PI DASZAK, PETER · 2014 to 2023
$4.3M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI110964
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStrategies are urgently needed to mitigate the risk of zoonotic disease emergence in southern China, where pathogens with zoonotic potential are known to circulate in wild animal populations. However, the risk factors leading to emergence are poorly understood, which presents a challenge in developing appropriate mitigation strategies for local communities.

methodsResidents in rural communities of Yunnan, Guangxi and Guangdong provinces were recruited and enrolled in this study. Data were collected through ethnographic interviews and field observations, and thematically coded and analysed to identify both risk and protective factors for zoonotic disease emergence at the individual, community and policy levels.

resultsEighty-eight ethnographic interviews and 55 field observations were conducted at nine selected sites. Frequent human-animal interactions and low levels of environmental biosecurity in local communities were identified as risks for zoonotic disease emergence. Policies and programmes existing in the communities provide opportunities for zoonotic risk mitigation.

conclusionsThis study explored the relationship among zoonotic risk and human behaviour, environment and policies in rural communities in southern China. It identifies key behavioural risk factors that can be targeted for development of tailored risk-mitigation strategies to reduce the threat of novel zoonoses.

Indexed as

Rural PopulationAdolescentAdultAnimalsAnimals, WildBetacoronavirusChinaCommunicable Diseases, EmergingCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicMale2019-nCoVcoronavirusethnographicqualitativerural communitiesSARSsouthern ChinaZoonotic Risk

Identifiers

PMID32040190
PMCPMC7017878
OpenAlexW3006661045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.