Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38909151›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Predicting chronic wasting disease in white-tailed deer at the county scale using machine learning.

Md Sohel Ahmed, Brenda J Hanley, Corey I Mitchell, Rachel C Abbott, Nicholas A Hollingshead, James G Booth, Joe Guinness, Christopher S Jennelle, Florian H Hodel, Carlos Gonzalez-Crespo and 25 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Strategic planning of prevention and surveillance for emerging diseases and invasive species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
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

35 authors.

Md Sohel AhmedWildlife Health Lab, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. sohelcu06@gmail.com.
Brenda J HanleyWildlife Health Lab, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Corey I MitchellDesert Centered Ecology, LLC, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Rachel C AbbottWildlife Health Lab, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Nicholas A HollingsheadWildlife Health Lab, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
James G BoothDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Joe GuinnessDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
Christopher S JennelleMinnesota Department of Natural Resources, Nongame Wildlife Program, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Florian H HodelDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Carlos Gonzalez-CrespoCenter for Animal Disease Modelling and Surveillance, University of California, Davis, CA, USA.
Christopher R MiddaughArkansas Game and Fish Commission, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Jennifer R BallardArkansas Game and Fish Commission, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Bambi ClemonsFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Charlie H KillmasterGeorgia Department of Natural Resources, Social Circle, GA, USA.
Tyler M HarmsIowa Department of Natural Resources, Ames, IA, USA.
Joe N CaudellIndiana Department of Natural Resources, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Kathryn M Benavidez WestrichIndiana Department of Natural Resources, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Emily McCallenIndiana Department of Natural Resources, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Christine CaseyKentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, KY, USA.
Lindsey M O'BrienMaryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD, USA.
Jonathan K TrudeauMaryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD, USA.
Chad StewartMichigan Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
Michelle CarstensenMinnesota Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Health Program, Forest Lake, MN, USA.
William T McKinleyMississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, Jackson, MS, USA.
Kevin P HynesNew York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Delmar, NY, USA.
Ashley E StevensNew York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Delmar, NY, USA.
Landon A MillerNew York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Delmar, NY, USA.
Merril CookNorth Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Ryan T MyersNorth Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Jonathan ShawNorth Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Michael J TonkovichOhio Department of Natural Resources, Athens, OH, USA.
James D KellyFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Daniel M GroveUniversity of Tennessee, Nashville, TN, USA.
Daniel J StormWisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, USA.
Krysten L SchulerWildlife Health Lab, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.

Funding

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service F23AP0048-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continued spread of chronic wasting disease (CWD) through wild cervid herds negatively impacts populations, erodes wildlife conservation, drains resource dollars, and challenges wildlife management agencies. Risk factors for CWD have been investigated at state scales, but a regional model to predict locations of new infections can guide increasingly efficient surveillance efforts. We predicted CWD incidence by county using CWD surveillance data depicting white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in 16 eastern and midwestern US states. We predicted the binary outcome of CWD-status using four machine learning models, utilized five-fold cross-validation and grid search to pinpoint the best model, then compared model predictions against the subsequent year of surveillance data. Cross validation revealed that the Light Boosting Gradient model was the most reliable predictor given the regional data. The predictive model could be helpful for surveillance planning. Predictions of false positives emphasize areas that warrant targeted CWD surveillance because of similar conditions with counties known to harbor CWD. However, disagreements in positives and negatives between the CWD Prediction Web App predictions and the on-the-ground surveillance data one year later underscore the need for state wildlife agency professionals to use a layered modeling approach to ensure robust surveillance planning. The CWD Prediction Web App is at https://cwd-predict.streamlit.app/ .

Indexed as

DeerMachine LearningWasting Disease, ChronicAnimalsAnimals, WildIncidenceUnited States

Identifiers

PMID38909151
PMCPMC11193737

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.