ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024
Attitudes towards zoonotic disease risk vary across sociodemographic, communication and health-related factors: A general population survey on literacy about zoonoses in the Netherlands.
Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human-animal contact and zoonotic exposure from wild and domestic animals: A cross-sectional study in wildlife-rich areas of Bolivia, Chile, and Guatemala.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Assessing risk perception and knowledge gaps of tick-borne diseases in Nei Mongol Zizhiqu and Northeast China.Science in One Health · 2026Article
- A land without veterinarians: animal health practices among smallholders in the Selva Maya.Tropical animal health and production · 2025Article
- A Survey on Companion Animal Owners' Perception of Veterinarians' Communication About Zoonoses and Antimicrobial Resistance in Germany.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Non-vaccinal prophylaxis of tularemia.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
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
Introduction: Literacy about zoonoses can contribute people adapt their behaviour to minimize zoonotic risks. In this study, associations between sociodemographic factors and zoonotic risk-averse attitudes were explored. Objective: To determine factors significantly associated with literacy about zoonoses across sociodemographic groups to inform targeted interventions aiming at improving awareness and zoonotic risk-avoidance behaviours. Method: Data was collected in 2022 using an online survey of a nationally representative sample of residents in the Netherlands. A multivariable logistic regression analysis, accounting for multiple hypothesis testing, was applied to assess whether there were significant associations between socio-demographic factors and attitudes towards zoonosis prevention. Results: A total of 2039 respondents completed the survey. People who were female, older, highly educated and those who searched for information about zoonoses, were relatively more likely to report behaviours favourable to the prevention of zoonoses. However, people with limited language and computer skills and immunocompromised people were significantly more likely to report risky behaviours. There were no significant associations found for pregnant women, dog and cat owners, those with an intermediate level of education and those who do have contact with farm animals. Conclusion: Certain sociodemographic groups display significantly riskier attitudes towards zoonoses. These groups provide targets where to improve literacy about zoonoses. This also implies that there is room for improvement in literacy about zoonoses, particularly among immunocompromised people and people with limited language and limited computer skills.
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.