Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33842576›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2021

Evidence-Based African Swine Fever Policies: Do We Address Virus and Host Adequately?

Frank Busch, Céline Haumont, Mary-Louise Penrith, Alberto Laddomada, Klaas Dietze, Anja Globig, Vittorio Guberti, Laura Zani, Klaus Depner

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. African Swine Fever: A One Health Perspective and Global Challenges.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Frank BuschInstitute of International Animal Health/One Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald, Germany.
Céline HaumontNational College of Veterinary Medicine, Food Science and Engineering, Oniris, Nantes, France.
Mary-Louise PenrithDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Alberto LaddomadaConsultant, Cagliari, Italy.
Klaas DietzeInstitute of International Animal Health/One Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald, Germany.
Anja GlobigInstitute of International Animal Health/One Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald, Germany.
Vittorio GubertiIstituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale, Epidemiology and Ecology Unit, Ozzano Emilia, Italy.
Laura ZaniInstitute of International Animal Health/One Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald, Germany.
Klaus DepnerInstitute of International Animal Health/One Health, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Greifswald, Germany.
Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DEIstituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale · ITOniris · FRUniversity of Cagliari · ITUniversity of Pretoria · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

African swine fever (ASF) is one of the most threatening diseases for the pig farming sector worldwide. Prevention, control and eradication remain a challenge, especially in the absence of an effective vaccine or cure and despite the relatively low contagiousness of this pathogen in contrast to Classical Swine Fever or Foot and Mouth disease, for example. Usually lethal in pigs and wild boar, this viral transboundary animal disease has the potential to significantly disrupt global trade and threaten food security. This paper outlines the importance of a disease-specific legal framework, based on the latest scientific evidence in order to improve ASF control. It compares the legal basis for ASF control in a number of pig-producing regions globally, considering diverse production systems, taking into account current scientific evidence in relation to ASF spread and control. We argue that blanket policies that do not take into account disease-relevant characteristics of a biological agent, nor the specifics under which the host species are kept, can hamper disease control efforts and may prove disproportionate.

Indexed as

African swine feverASF policiesASF surveillancebackyard farmcontagiousnessdisease controllegislationtransboundary animal disease

Identifiers

PMID33842576
PMCPMC8024515
OpenAlexW3129964317

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.