ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2025
A framework for quantifying the multisectoral burden of animal disease to support decision making.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Manure management during African swine fever outbreak: identifying gaps through a narrative review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Assessment of economic burden of lumpy skin disease in India using stochastic modeling.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal diseases have wide-ranging impacts in multiple societal arenas, including agriculture, public health and the environment. These diseases cause significant economic losses for farmers, disrupt food security and present zoonotic risks to human populations. Additionally, they contribute to antimicrobial resistance and a range of environmental issues such as greenhouse gas emissions. The societal and ecological costs of livestock diseases are frequently underrepresented or unaddressed in policy decisions and resource allocations. Social cost-benefit analysis (SCBA) offers a comprehensive framework to evaluate the broad impacts of animal diseases across different sectors. This approach aligns with the One Health concept, which seeks to integrate and optimize the health of humans, animals and the environment. Traditional economic evaluations often focus narrowly on profit maximization within the livestock sector, neglecting wider externalities such as public health and environmental impacts. In contrast, SCBA takes a multi-sectoral whole-system view, considering multiple factors to guide public and private sector investments toward maximizing societal benefits. This paper discusses three separate sector specific (Animal health, Human health, Environmental health) methodologies for quantifying the burden of animal diseases. It then discusses how these estimates can be combined to generate multisectoral estimates of the impacts of animal diseases on human societies and the environment using monetary values. Finally this paper explores how this framework can support the evaluation of interventions from a One Health perspective though SCBA. This integrated assessment framework supports informed decision-making and resource allocation, ultimately contributing to improved public health outcomes, enhanced animal welfare, and greater environmental sustainability.
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.