ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020
Active responses to outbreaks of infectious wildlife diseases: objectives, strategies and constraints determine feasibility and success.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative support for the benefits of proactive management for wildlife disease control.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- The effectiveness of harvest for limiting wildlife disease: Insights from 20 years of chronic wasting disease in Wyoming.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025Article
- Chemical disinfection as a simple and reliable method to control the amphibian chytrid fungus at breeding points of endangered amphibians.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The importance of fine-scale predictors of wild boar habitat use in an isolated population.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Microbial ecology and evolution is key to pandemics: using the coronavirus model to mitigate future public health challenges.Heliyon · 2022Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging wildlife diseases are taking a heavy toll on animal and plant species worldwide. Mitigation, particularly in the initial epidemic phase, is hindered by uncertainty about the epidemiology and management of emerging diseases, but also by vague or poorly defined objectives. Here, we use a quantitative analysis to assess how the decision context of mitigation objectives, available strategies and practical constraints influences the decision of whether and how to respond to epidemics in wildlife. To illustrate our approach, we parametrized the model for European fire salamanders affected by
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.