ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Human-animal contact to inform zoonotic disease risk across gradients of agricultural land use change in the Central River Region (CRR) of The Gambia (ZooContact): a formative study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The burden of diseases from human-animal contact in 2021: a spatiotemporal analysis using the "Production-Living-Ecology" framework.BMC global and public health · 2026Article
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: Pilot studies are important initial steps in research, providing a preliminary assessment of the practicality, feasibility, and potential challenges of a proposed study. This study attempts to assess the feasibility, practicality, and acceptability of a study that integrates a human-animal contact (HAC) questionnaire, animal biodiversity survey using acoustic analysis, and zoonotic disease investigation in animals among rural households in the Central River Region (CRR) of The Gambia. The pilot study revealed granular insights that would otherwise go unnoticed, providing vital information that directly guided the design and implementation of the subsequent full-scale study on zoonotic disease risk. Methods: A pilot study was conducted in five villages in the CRR of The Gambia. Community sensitization was carried out together with the village leadership, followed by a familiarization tour of the study setting. Questionnaire-based interview was conducted among participants ( Results: The recruitment rate was 96%, and most participants, 50 out of 52, were willing to participate without compensation for lost time during interviews. For animal sampling, 45 out of 50 participants were willing to allow the study team to sample blood and feces from their animals without any form of incentive. All five village heads agreed to the usage of sound recorders to be placed within their community for animal biodiversity assessment. For the survey effort, one field assistant interviewed 25 participants per week. It took a total of 1 h to complete an interview, including random household selection, consenting, and questionnaire interview. Discussion: The pilot study confirmed the feasibility of the research and informed the design of the larger study. Key parameters, such as community access, acceptability, recruitment success, and logistical requirements, contributed to robust sample size calculations and realistic project cost estimates. Additionally, the study enabled the research team to familiarize themselves with the communities and refine the methods for the full study.
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.