ArticleTransboundary and emerging diseases2022
A methodology to assess indirect economic impacts of animal disease outbreaks: A case of hypothetical African swine fever outbreak in Switzerland.
Article in Transboundary and emerging diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- WiBISS: a tool to estimate avoided lost revenue of African swine fever wild boar vaccination at municipality level.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Mental health impacts of African swine fever outbreaks on veterinarians in the Philippines.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- The burden of disease in Swiss pork production.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- A methodology to assess indirect economic impacts of animal disease outbreaks: A case of hypothetical African swine fever outbreak in Switzerland.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indirect costs of animal disease outbreaks often significantly exceed the direct costs. Despite their importance, indirect costs remain poorly characterized due to their complexity. In this study, we developed a framework to assess the indirect costs of a hypothetical African swine fever outbreak in Switzerland. We collected data through international and national stakeholder interviews, analysis of national disease control regulations and industry data. We developed a framework to capture the resulting qualitative and quantitative data, categorize the impacts of these regulations, and rank the impacts in order of importance. We then developed a spreadsheet model to calculate the indirect costs of one category of control measure for an individual group of stakeholders. We developed a decision tree model to guide the most economically favourable implementation plan for a given control measure category, under different outbreak scenarios. Our results suggest that the most important measure/impact categories were 'Transport logistics', 'Consumer demand', 'Prevention of wild boar and domestic pig contact' and 'Slaughter logistics'. In our hypothetical scenario, the greatest costs associated with 'Prevention of wild boar and domestic pig contact' were due to assumed partial or total depopulation of fattening pig farms in order to reduce herd size to comply with the simulated control regulations. The model also provides suggestions on the most economically favourable strategy to reduce contact between wild boar and domestic pigs in control areas. Our approach provides a new framework to integrate qualitative and quantitative data to guide disease control strategy. This method could be useful in other countries and for other diseases, including in data- and resource-poor settings, or areas with limited experience of animal disease outbreaks.
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.