Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35754996›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2022

Understanding the relative risks of zoonosis emergence under contrasting approaches to meeting livestock product demand.

Harriet Bartlett, Mark A Holmes, Silviu O Petrovan, David R Williams, James L N Wood, Andrew Balmford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Climate change and antimicrobial resistance.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Optimization of stool culture protocol in a tertiary hospital in Bangkok, Thailand: a prospective cohort study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The emergence and diversification of a zoonotic pathogen from within the microbiota of intensively farmed pigs.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Harriet BartlettDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7389-8785
Mark A HolmesDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Silviu O PetrovanDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
David R WilliamsSustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
James L N WoodDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Andrew BalmfordDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M011194/1Medical Research Council MR/N002660/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has been argued that intensive livestock farming increases the risk of pandemics of zoonotic origin because of long-distance livestock movements, high livestock densities, poor animal health and welfare, low disease resistance and low genetic diversity. However, data on many of these factors are limited, and analyses to date typically ignore how land use affects emerging infectious disease (EID) risks, and how these risks might vary across systems with different yields (production per unit area). Extensive, lower yielding practices typically involve larger livestock populations, poorer biosecurity, more workers and more area under farming, resulting in different, but not necessarily lower, EID risks than higher yielding systems producing the same amount of food. To move this discussion forward, we review the evidence for each of the factors that potentially link livestock production practices to EID risk. We explore how each factor might vary with yield and consider how overall risks might differ across a mix of production systems chosen to reflect in broad terms the current livestock sector at a global level and in hypothetical low- and high-yield systems matched by overall level of production. We identify significant knowledge gaps for all potential risk factors and argue these shortfalls in understanding mean we cannot currently determine whether lower or higher yielding systems would better limit the risk of future pandemics.

Indexed as

agriculturebiodiversityemergencelivestockspilloverzoonoses

Identifiers

PMID35754996
PMCPMC9214290

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.