Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39783998›Full record

ArticleJournal of agromedicine2025

Human Health Surveillance During Animal Disease Emergencies: Minnesota Department of Health Response to Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Outbreaks, 2015 and 2022-2023.

Joni M Scheftel, Kelly E Schenk, Leah J Bauck, Maria L Bye, Malia J Ireland, Carrie A Klumb, Leslie M Kollmann, Kirk E Smith, Shauna J Voss, Brian L Hoefs and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of agromedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Joni M ScheftelMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Kelly E SchenkMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Leah J BauckMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Maria L ByeMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Malia J IrelandMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Carrie A KlumbMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Leslie M KollmannMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Kirk E SmithMinnesota Department of Health, Foodborne, Waterborne, Vectorborne, and Zoonotic Diseases Section , St. Paul, MN, USA.
Shauna J VossMinnesota Board of Animal Health, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Brian L HoefsMinnesota Board of Animal Health, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Lucia J HuntMinnesota Department of Agriculture, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Stacy M HolzbauerMinnesota Department of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, St. Paul, MN, USA.

Funding

CDC HHS NU38OT000297Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHighly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) poses an occupational risk for poultry workers, responders, and others in contact with infected birds. The objective of this analysis was to describe HPAI surveillance methods and outcomes, and highlight the challenges, successes, and lessons learned during the Minnesota Department of Health's (MDH's) public health response to HPAI outbreaks in Minnesota poultry flocks in the years 2015 and 2022-2023.

methodsDuring both outbreaks, MDH staff attempted to contact all potentially exposed people and conduct a standardized interview. People were considered exposed and at risk if they had entered a barn with poultry on any HPAI test-positive premises. With their consent, exposed persons were entered into illness monitoring until 10 days from their last exposure. In 2015, MDH monitored the health of poultry workers only. In the 2022-2023 response, MDH monitored the health of poultry workers, backyard flock owners, responders, and private contract workers. In 2022-2023, interview responses were entered into a REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) database in real time, which automatically entered the person into monitoring if they consented. Through REDCap, they received an automated email with a unique link to a short survey asking about any symptom development. Where appropriate, interview responses from poultry workers collected in 2015 were compared to interview responses from poultry workers collected in 2022-2023.

resultsFrom March 3 to June 5, 2015, MDH epidemiologists interviewed and evaluated 375 (86%) of 435 poultry workers from 110 HPAI-infected flocks. From March 25, 2022 through December 31, 2023, MDH epidemiologists interviewed and evaluated 649 (65%) of 992 poultry workers, responders, contractors, and backyard flock owners associated with 151 HPAI-infected flocks. Among poultry workers, self-reported personal protective equipment (PPE) usage declined significantly from 2015 to 2022-2023 (full PPE usage 51.8% vs. 23.9%,

conclusionMDH's long standing relationships with animal health officials and the poultry industry resulted in strong poultry worker participation rates in surveillance efforts during HPAI outbreaks in 2015 and 2022-2023. Self-reported PPE usage was low, particularly in 2022-2023. Improvements in PPE accessibility and technology are needed to protect workers and responders in the on-going HPAI outbreak.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksInfluenza, HumanInfluenza in BirdsAnimalsEmergenciesHumansMinnesotaOccupational ExposurePoultryHighly pathogenic avian influenzaOne Healthpersonal protective equipmentpoultry workerspublic health response

Identifiers

PMID39783998
PMCPMC12162230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.