ArticlePloS one2020
How much does it cost to prevent and control visceral leishmaniasis in Brazil? Comparing different measures in dogs.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk and protective factors for canine visceral leishmaniasis in the Americas: a systematic review update with meta-analysis.Parasites & vectors · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnosis of visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis using loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) protocols: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Parasites & vectors · 2022Pooled it
- First quantitative assessment of the effects of parasite control in dogs and cats in the UK.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Current evidence of the economic value of One Health initiatives: A systematic literature review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Review
- Finding Priority Areas in the Evaluation of Strategies for the Prevention of Leishmaniasis in an Endemic Municipality of Brazil.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- Clinical and parasitological impact of short-term treatment using miltefosine and allopurinol monotherapy or combination therapy in canine visceral leishmaniasis.Revista brasileira de parasitologia veterinaria = Brazilian journal of veterinary parasitology : Orgao Oficial do Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is an important zoonosis in Brazil. Dogs are considered the main domestic reservoirs of the disease in the country; hence, control measures are focused on these reservoirs. Despite efforts to prevent and control VL, important reductions in disease prevalence and incidence have not been identified, stimulating the development and application of new strategies. The choice and implementation of new control strategies can benefit from the application of mathematical models that allow the simulation of different strategies in different scenarios. Selecting the best strategy to be implemented is also supported by cost-effectiveness studies. Here we used the results of a mathematical model in which scenarios, including isolated use of the vaccine and insecticide-impregnated collar (IIC), both at different coverage rates, were simulated to conduct a cost-effectiveness study. The costs were calculated for each scenario considering a simulation period of four years. Collar application in both infected and non-infected animals was the most cost-effective strategy. For example, to reduce the prevalence in humans and dogs by approximately 70%, the costs ranged from $250,000 and $550,000 for the IICs and vaccination, respectively. Even in the scenario with 40% loss/replacement of IICs, this measure was more advantageous in terms of cost-effectiveness than vaccination. If the vaccine were applied with culling of seropositive tested dogs, then the measure became more effective with a reduced cost compared with the vaccine alone. The use of the three first consecutive vaccine doses had the greatest impact on the cost of the vaccination strategy. The advantage of using IICs is that there is no need for a prior diagnosis, unlike vaccination, reducing costs and facilitating implementation. The present study aims to contribute to strategies to reduce hosts infected with VL by reducing public expenditure.
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.