Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38903686›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in veterinary science2024

Foot and mouth disease vaccine efficacy in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ashenafi Kiros Wubshet, Gebremeskel Mamu Werid, Teshale Teklue, Luoyi Zhou, Chimedtseren Bayasgalan, Ariunaa Tserendorj, Jinjin Liu, Livio Heath, Yuefeng Sun, Yaozhong Ding and 4 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

14 authors.

Ashenafi Kiros WubshetState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, National/OIE Foot and Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, China.
Gebremeskel Mamu WeridDavies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA, Australia.
Teshale TeklueMekelle Agricultural Research Center, Mekelle, Ethiopia.
Luoyi ZhouState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, National/OIE Foot and Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, China.
Chimedtseren BayasgalanSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Ariunaa TserendorjSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Jinjin LiuHebei Key Laboratory of Preventive Veterinary Medicine, College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Normal University of Science and Technology, Qinhuangdao, China.
Livio HeathTransboundary Animal Diseases Programme, Onderstepoort Veterinary Research, Agricultural Research Council, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Yuefeng SunState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, National/OIE Foot and Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, China.
Yaozhong DingState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, National/OIE Foot and Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, China.
Wenxiu WangShandong Binzhou Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine Academy, Binzhou, China.
Alexei D ZaberezhnyFederal State Budgetary Scientific Institution "All-Russian Research and Technological Institute of Biological Industry" (FSBSI VNITIBP), Moscow, Russia.
Yongsheng LiuHebei Key Laboratory of Preventive Veterinary Medicine, College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Normal University of Science and Technology, Qinhuangdao, China.
Jie ZhangState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, National/OIE Foot and Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several factors, such as diverse serotypes, vaccination methods, weak biosecurity, and animal movements, contribute to recurrent Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus (FMDV) outbreaks in Africa, establishing endemicity. These outbreaks cost over $2 billion annually, prompting a high-priority focus on FMDV vaccination. Despite extensive efforts, vaccine efficacy varies. This study aims to evaluate routine foot and mouth disease (FMD) vaccines in Africa via systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of FMDV vaccination using the meta for package of R. Results: Vaccinated animals have roughly a 69.3% lower chance of FMDV infection compared to unvaccinated animals, as indicated by the pooled results from the random-effects model, which showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.3073. There was a statistically significant heterogeneity ( Conclusion: Overall findings suggest that if properly planned and implemented, FMDV vaccination programs and strategies in Africa could help control the spread of the disease throughout the continent and beyond.

Indexed as

AfricaeffectivenessefficacyFMDVFMD vaccine

Identifiers

PMID38903686
PMCPMC11187330

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.