Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37889698›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

The Role of Wildlife and Pests in the Transmission of Pathogenic Agents to Domestic Pigs: A Systematic Review.

Iryna Makovska, Pankaj Dhaka, Ilias Chantziaras, Joana Pessoa, Jeroen Dewulf

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Iryna MakovskaVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9299-6682
Pankaj DhakaVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9402-8263
Ilias ChantziarasVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Joana PessoaVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-8959-9333
Jeroen DewulfVeterinary Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9843-5990
Ghent University · BEGuru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wild animals and pests are important reservoirs and vectors of pathogenic agents that can affect domestic pigs. Rapid globalization, anthropogenic factors, and increasing trends toward outdoor pig production facilitate the contact between domestic pigs and wildlife. However, knowledge on the transmission pathways between domestic pigs and the aforementioned target groups is limited. The present systematic review aims to collect and analyze information on the roles of different wild animal species and pests in the spread of pathogens to domesticated pigs. Overall, 1250 peer-reviewed manuscripts published in English between 2010 and 2022 were screened through the PRISMA framework using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. A total of 84 studies reporting possible transmission routes of different pathogenic agents were included. A majority of the studies (80%) focused on the role of wild boars in the transmission of pathogenic agents to pig farms. Studies involving the role of rodents (7%), and deer (6%) were the next most frequent, whereas the role of insects (5%), wild carnivores (5%), wild birds (4%), cats (2%), and badgers (1%) were less available. Only 3.5% of studies presented evidence-based transmission routes from wildlife to domestic pigs. Approximately 65.5% of the included studies described possible risks/risk factors for pathogens' transmission based on quantitative data, whereas 31% of the articles only presented a hypothesis or qualitative analysis of possible transmission routes or risk factors and/or contact rates. Risk factors identified include outdoor farms or extensive systems and farms with a low level of biosecurity as well as wildlife behavior; environmental conditions; human activities and movements; fomites, feed (swill feeding), water, carcasses, and bedding materials. We recommend the strengthening of farm biosecurity frameworks with special attention to wildlife-associated parameters, especially in extensive rearing systems and high-risk zones as it was repeatedly found to be an important measure to prevent pathogen transmission to domestic pigs. In addition, there is a need to focus on effective risk-based wildlife surveillance mechanisms and to raise awareness among farmers about existing wildlife-associated risk factors for disease transmission.

Indexed as

African swine feverbiosecuritypig farmingrisk factorswild boars

Identifiers

PMID37889698
PMCPMC10251848
OpenAlexW4379053769

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.