Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39242509›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

Beliefs, taboos, usages, health perceptions, and practices toward wildlife among different ethnicities in Tak and Mae Hong Son Provinces, Thailand.

Kanokwan Suwannarong, Thanomsin Ponlap, Kannika Thammasutti, Worakamon Thongkan, Karnsunaphat Balthip, Nisachon Bubpa, Phitsanuruk Kanthawee, Sipapa Pummarak, Kangsadal Suwannarong, Alongkorn Amonsin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Kanokwan SuwannarongCenter of Excellence for Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases in Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thanomsin PonlapSUPA71 Co., Ltd, Ladprao, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kannika ThammasuttiCenter of Excellence for Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases in Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok, Thailand.
Worakamon ThongkanSUPA71 Co., Ltd, Ladprao, Bangkok, Thailand.
Karnsunaphat BalthipFaculty of Nursing, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand.
Nisachon BubpaFaculty of Nursing, Khon Kaen University, Muang, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Phitsanuruk KanthaweeSchool of Health Science, Mae Fah Luang University, Muang, Chiang Rai, Thailand.
Sipapa PummarakFaculty of Nursing and Allied Health, Dhonburi Rajabhat University, Thonburi, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kangsadal SuwannarongThe Office of Disease Prevention and Control 7 Khon Kaen, Mueang Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Alongkorn AmonsinCenter of Excellence for Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases in Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok, Thailand. alongkorn.a@chula.ac.th.

Funding

The Thailand Science Research and Innovation Fund Chulalongkorn University HEAF67310064
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This concurrent qualitative study was carried out with the main objective to determine wildlife beliefs, taboos, usages, health perceptions, and practices among ten ethnic groups in four communities in Tak and Mae Hong Son provinces of Thailand from November 2020 to January 2021. We also gathered comprehensive information on study respondents' knowledge related to potential risk behaviors that could lead to zoonotic disease transmission and infection. Furthermore, we intended to use the study's findings to develop communication strategies and health literacy improvement interventions for mitigating risky behaviors, with a focus on ethnic groups and particular individuals who live in close proximity to forests and wildlife, to prevent future pandemics. Sixty-five respondents were purposively selected based on their extensive knowledge, active participation in local cultural contexts, beliefs, and exposure to wildlife contact or consuming game animals. Twenty (30.8%) participated in in-depth interviews (IDIs), while 45 (69.2%) participated in eight focused group discussions (FGDs). The results revealed that the characteristics of wildlife contact are similar and distinct based on their beliefs and taboos among various ethnic groups and study locations, which are influenced by cultural backgrounds and traditions. Although some ethnic groups do not have explicit restrictions on the consumption of wildlife, others adhere to specific beliefs and taboos that forbid the consumption or killing of specific wild animals. These beliefs frequently correspond with conservation initiatives, thereby facilitating the preservation of threatened species. The study also revealed a lack of appropriate health knowledge, perceptions, and practices regarding wildlife contact and consumption. As a result, it is recommended that public health officials and local governments develop and execute communication and education initiatives. These campaigns should aim to increase health literacy and promote safe handling, preparation, and cooking practices to reduce the risk of zoonotic disease transmission and infection effectively. Moreover, it is necessary to design and implement wildlife conservation education and outreach activities. The programs should promote environmental stewardship while considering the cultural contexts, beliefs, and practices of various ethnic groups. The activities should involve diverse stakeholders, including local leaders, religious influencers, community members, schoolteachers, students, health professionals, village health volunteers, and civil society organizations.

Indexed as

Animals, WildEthnicityHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeQualitative ResearchTabooAdultAnimalsFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedThailandYoung AdultZoonosesBeliefCultureEthnicityInterfaceMae Hong SonPerceptionTabooTakThailandWildlife

Identifiers

PMID39242509
PMCPMC11380376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.