Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34451440›Full record

ReviewPathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Critical Systematic Review of Zoonoses and Transboundary Animal Diseases' Prioritization in Africa.

Serge Eugene Mpouam, Jean Pierre Kilekoung Mingoas, Mohamed Moctar Mouliom Mouiche, Jean Marc Kameni Feussom, Claude Saegerman

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Serge Eugene MpouamSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere P.O. Box 454, Cameroon.
Jean Pierre Kilekoung MingoasSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere P.O. Box 454, Cameroon.
Mohamed Moctar Mouliom MouicheSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere P.O. Box 454, Cameroon.ORCID 0000-0002-4900-3670
Jean Marc Kameni FeussomCameroon Epidemiological Network for Animal Diseases (RESCAM), Directorate of Veterinary Services, Ministry of Livestock, Fisheries and Animal Industries (MINEPIA), Yaounde P.O. Box 8211, Cameroon.
Claude SaegermanResearch Unit in Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Applied to Veterinary Sciences (UREAR-ULiege), Fundamental and Applied Research for Animals & Health (FARAH) Centre, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Liege University, 4000 Liege, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9087-7436
University of Ngaoundéré · CMMinistry of Livestock, Fisheries and Animal Industries · CMUniversity of Liège · BEWWF Cameroon · CM

Funding

IMMANA is co-funded with UK Aid from the UK government and by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation INV-002962 / OPP1211308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisease prioritization aims to enhance resource use efficiency concerning human and animal health systems' preparedness and response to the most important problems for the optimization of beneficial outcomes. In sub-Sahara Africa (SSA), several prioritizations of zoonoses and transboundary animal diseases (TADs) have been implemented at different scales to characterize potential disease impacts. Method and principal findings: In this systematic review, we analyze the methodologies used, outcomes, and their relevance by discussing criteria required to align decision-makers' perceptions of impacts to those of other stakeholders for different prioritization in SSA. In general, the sectorial representativeness of stakeholders for processes implemented with the support of international partners showed slight differences with the absence of local stakeholders. Whatever the tool prioritized, zoonoses were similar in general because of the structured nature of those tools in assessing decision-makers' preferences through value trade-offs between criteria while ensuring transparency and reproducibility. However, by involving field practitioners and farmers, there were different outcomes with processes concerning only decision makers and experts who were more sensitive to infectious TADs, while the former raised parasitic disease constraints. In this context, multicriteria decision analysis-based zoonoses and TADs prioritizations involving a balanced participation of stakeholders might contribute to bridging these divergences, whatever the scale. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE: Prioritization processes were important steps toward building and harmonizing technical laboratory and surveillance networks to coordinate projects to address priority zoonoses and TADs at the country and/or sub-regional level. Those processes should be enhanced.

Indexed as

Africacritical systematic reviewprioritizationtransboundary animal diseaseszoonoses

Identifiers

PMID34451440
PMCPMC8401284
OpenAlexW3191857415

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.