Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33793560›Full record

ReviewPLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Reviewing the ecological evidence base for management of emerging tropical zoonoses: Kyasanur Forest Disease in India as a case study.

Sarah J Burthe, Stefanie M Schäfer, Festus A Asaaga, Natrajan Balakrishnan, Mohammed Mudasssar Chanda, Narayanaswamy Darshan, Subhash L Hoti, Shivani K Kiran, Tanya Seshadri, Prashanth N Srinivas and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Climate Change and Zoonoses: A Review of Concepts, Definitions, and Bibliometrics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarah J BurtheUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8871-3432
Stefanie M SchäferUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8748-7725
Festus A AsaagaUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2675-9464
Natrajan BalakrishnanICAR-National Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Disease Informatics, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0002-4169-8893
Mohammed Mudasssar ChandaICAR-National Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Disease Informatics, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5727-8658
Narayanaswamy DarshanDepartment of Health and Family Welfare Services, Government of Karnataka, Shivamogga, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3440-7581
Subhash L HotiICMR-National Institute for Traditional Medicine, Belgavi, India.ORCID 0000-0001-6784-3860
Shivani K KiranDepartment of Health and Family Welfare Services, Government of Karnataka, Shivamogga, India.
Tanya SeshadriVivekananda Gorukana Kalyana Kendra (VGKK), Chamarajanagar, India.ORCID 0000-0002-7357-0472
Prashanth N SrinivasAshoka Trust for Ecology and the Environment, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0968-0826
Abi T VanakAshoka Trust for Ecology and the Environment, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2435-4260
Bethan V PurseUK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, United Kingdom.
UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology · GBGovernment of Karnataka · INNational Institute Of Veterinary Epidemiology And Disease Informatics · INAshoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment · INInstitute of Public Health Bengaluru · INKrishi Vigyan Kendra, Ghatkhed Amravati · IN

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/CPHI/16/1/502648Medical Research Council MR/P024335/1Medical Research Council MR/P024335/2Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Zoonoses disproportionately affect tropical communities and are associated with human modification and use of ecosystems. Effective management is hampered by poor ecological understanding of disease transmission and often focuses on human vaccination or treatment. Better ecological understanding of multi-vector and multi-host transmission, social and environmental factors altering human exposure, might enable a broader suite of management options. Options may include "ecological interventions" that target vectors or hosts and require good knowledge of underlying transmission processes, which may be more effective, economical, and long lasting than conventional approaches. New frameworks identify the hierarchical series of barriers that a pathogen needs to overcome before human spillover occurs and demonstrate how ecological interventions may strengthen these barriers and complement human-focused disease control. We extend these frameworks for vector-borne zoonoses, focusing on Kyasanur Forest Disease Virus (KFDV), a tick-borne, neglected zoonosis affecting poor forest communities in India, involving complex communities of tick and host species. We identify the hierarchical barriers to pathogen transmission targeted by existing management. We show that existing interventions mainly focus on human barriers (via personal protection and vaccination) or at barriers relating to Kyasanur Forest Disease (KFD) vectors (tick control on cattle and at the sites of host (monkey) deaths). We review the validity of existing management guidance for KFD through literature review and interviews with disease managers. Efficacy of interventions was difficult to quantify due to poor empirical understanding of KFDV-vector-host ecology, particularly the role of cattle and monkeys in the disease transmission cycle. Cattle are hypothesised to amplify tick populations. Monkeys may act as sentinels of human infection or are hypothesised to act as amplifying hosts for KFDV, but the spatial scale of risk arising from ticks infected via monkeys versus small mammal reservoirs is unclear. We identified 19 urgent research priorities for refinement of current management strategies or development of ecological interventions targeting vectors and host barriers to prevent disease spillover in the future.

Indexed as

MammalsAnimalsAnimals, WildDisease ReservoirsEcosystemEncephalitis Viruses, Tick-BorneIndiaKyasanur Forest DiseaseZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID33793560
PMCPMC8016103
OpenAlexW3141415398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.