ArticlePloS one2024
The final plague outbreak in Scotland 1644-1649: Historical, archaeological, and genetic evidence.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper has several aims: to determine if Yersinia pestis was the causative agent in the last Scottish plague outbreak in the mid-17th century; map the geographic spread of the epidemic and isolate potential contributing factors to its spread and severity; and examine funerary behaviours in the context of a serious plague epidemic in early modern Scotland. Results confirm the presence of Y. pestis in individuals associated with a mid-17th century plague pit in Aberdeen. This is the first time this pathogen has been identified in an archaeological sample from Scotland. The geographic spread of the plague from 1644 through to 1649 is generally, with some key exceptions, restricted to the central lowlands of Scotland. The role of administrative responses to the epidemic in managing its spread and distribution is unclear. Finally, normative funerary practices tended to co-exist with mass burial scenarios. In conclusion, the distribution of the epidemic is arguably a function of population density/distribution, transportation networks, and the chaos associated with the concurrent civil war. Administrative responses to the epidemic likely had a variable, albeit limited, effect in the central lowlands. More peripheral cities, such as Aberdeen, while also employing sophisticated plague prevention measures, were perhaps initially spared simply due to their distance from the central plague belt. It is unclear if a general fear of the dead and contracting the Pest from plague victims can be used to characterise mid-17th century Scottish public opinion. Mass burial appears to have been a practical approach to the logistical problems mass mortality presented, while many instances of normative burial treatment can also be seen.
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.