ArticlePloS one2024
Human-animal entanglements in bushmeat trading in Sierra Leone: An ethnographic assessment of a potential zoonotic interface.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of health risk assessment in Africa's bushmeat trade: Are there any risks assessed?PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Tick-Tac-Foe: When Ticks, Trade, and Zoonotic Pathogens Align in African Wet Meat Markets.Public health challenges · 2026Review
- Occupational Exposure and Economic Inequity Along a Game Meat Trade Network in Cross River State, Nigeria.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Profiling of bushmeat value chain actors in the northern sector of Ghana for targeted interventions to reduce zoonotic disease and public health risks.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Challenges in understanding and communicating the risk of zoonotic disease spillover from wild animal meat.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
'Bushmeat' markets are often portrayed as chaotic spaces where exotic wild animals are sold. They are hypothesized to be important sites for zoonotic disease transmission, given the prolonged and intense nature of the cross-species encounters that occur within them. Whilst such markets have received some attention from researchers, rich qualitative descriptions of everyday practices in these markets are rare. Depictions of wild animal markets as sites for potential viral amplification often rely on exoticizing assumptions and narratives rather than actual evidence, and in some cases are based more on ideology than on science. We provide an in-depth ethnographic account of two bushmeat markets in Bo, Sierra Leone. Our analysis goes beyond common assumptions that zoonotic risk is located solely in the knowledge and behaviours of traders. Our account sheds light on the modes of touch, closeness and contact that shape this hypothesised zoonotic interface, outlining the possible risks to different people who use and spend time in the market. We found that inadequate infrastructure and sanitation facilities created risks of zoonotic disease transmission for diverse actors including traders, customers, children, and the wider public. Butchering and trading practices frequently resulted in people directly and indirectly encountering animal fluids. We also discuss how public health management of these markets focused on individual behaviours rather than on improving conditions. Urgent sanitary reform and infrastructure upgrades in these sites that support the economic needs of traders could encourage voluntary compliance with biosafety measures amongst traders seeking to balance responsibilities to family and public health. Our study reveals the value of moving beyond exoticized narratives about bushmeat markets to yield situated insights for reducing risk at this interface.
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.