Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37545541›Full record

ReviewOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2023

The global burden of neglected zoonotic diseases: Current state of evidence.

Carlotta Di Bari, Narmada Venkateswaran, Christina Fastl, Sarah Gabriël, Delia Grace, Arie H Havelaar, Ben Huntington, Grace T Patterson, Jonathan Rushton, Niko Speybroeck and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Pathogens and planetary change.Nature reviews. Biodiversity · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

13 authors.

Carlotta Di BariGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Narmada VenkateswaranGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Christina FastlGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Sarah GabriëlDepartment of Translational Physiology, Infectiology and Public Health, Ghent University, Merelbeke, Belgium.
Delia GraceGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Arie H HavelaarGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Ben HuntingtonGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Grace T PattersonGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jonathan RushtonGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Niko SpeybroeckInsititute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium.
Paul TorgersonGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
David M PigottGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Brecht DevleesschauwerGBADs programme, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The majority of emerging infectious diseases are zoonoses, most of which are classified as "neglected". By affecting both humans and animals, zoonoses pose a dual burden. The disability-adjusted life year (DALY) metric quantifies human health burden since it combines mortality and morbidity. This review aims to describe and analyze the current state of evidence on neglected zoonotic diseases (NZDs) burden and start a discussion on the current understanding of the global burden of NZDs. We identified 26 priority NZDs through consulting three international repositories for national prioritization exercises. A systematic review of global and national burden of disease (BoD) studies was conducted using pre-selected databases. Data on diseases, location and DALYs were extracted for each eligible study. A total of 1887 records were screened, resulting in 74 eligible studies. The highest number of BoD was found for non-typhoidal salmonellosis (23), whereas no estimates were found for West Nile, Marburg and Lassa fever. Geographically, the highest number of studies was performed in the Netherlands (11), China (5) and Iran (4). The number of BoD retrieved mismatched the perceived importance in national prioritization exercises. For example, anthrax was considered a priority NZD in 65 countries; however, only one national study estimating BoD was retrieved. By summing the available global estimates, the selected NZDs caused at least 21 million DALYs per year, a similar order of magnitude to (but less than) the burden due to foodborne disease (included in the Foodborne Disease Burden Epidemiology Reference Group). The global burden of disease landscape of NZDs remains scattered. There are several priority NZDs for which no burden estimates exist, and the number of BoD studies does not reflect national disease priorities. To have complete and consistent estimates of the global burden of NZDs, these diseases should be integrated in larger global burden of disease initiatives.

Indexed as

Burden of diseaseDisability-adjusted life yearsNeglected zoonotic diseasesYears lived with disabilityYears of life lost

Identifiers

PMID37545541
PMCPMC10400928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.