Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40303185›Full record

ArticleTransboundary and emerging diseases2024

Methods and Tools Used for Biosecurity Assessment in Livestock Farms in Africa: A Scoping Review.

Ronald Vougat Ngom, Andrea Laconi, Mohamed M M Mouiche, Gaspard J Ayissi, Adonis M M Akoussa, Stephane D Ziebe, Giuditta Tilli, Henriette A Zangue, Alessandra Piccirillo

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Transboundary and emerging diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors.

Ronald Vougat NgomSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4385-6744
Andrea LaconiDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, 35020, Legnaro, Italy.
Mohamed M M MouicheSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.
Gaspard J AyissiSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.
Adonis M M AkoussaSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.
Stephane D ZiebeSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.
Giuditta TilliDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, 35020, Legnaro, Italy.
Henriette A ZangueSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Sciences, University of Ngaoundere, Ngaoundere 454, Cameroon.
Alessandra PiccirilloDepartment of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, University of Padua, 35020, Legnaro, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Farm biosecurity has gained increasing attention worldwide during the last decades because of its role in reducing the occurrence of diseases and improving animal performance. Recently, recommendations to reinforce the concept of farm biosecurity in lower- and middle-income countries have been advised. Therefore, this review aims to provide a comprehensive description of the methods and tools used to assess biosecurity compliance in livestock farms in Africa and formulate recommendations. The present review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews guidelines. Peer-reviewed studies reporting biosecurity assessment in poultry, cattle, pig, goat, or sheep farms in Africa were included. Five databases were searched with no date restrictions. A total of 41 studies across 17 countries were finally selected. Selected studies were all published after 2008, and an increasing trend in the number of papers published per year was noticed. In total, 41 different methods for biosecurity assessment were found to be used in African countries, meaning that even within the same country, the same animal species, and the same farming system, different methods were utilized. In many papers, the methods used for biosecurity evaluation were poorly described. In addition, during the biosecurity assessment, measures related to the purchase of laying hens, egg transport and management, calves, calving and dairy management, and nursery units were almost not considered. These measures should be contemplated in future studies since they are related to important risk factors for the introduction and dissemination of infectious diseases. Interestingly, some measures not considered in European biosecurity tools were identified in the selected studies. The observed high difference in methods used may be due to the lack of regulations on biosecurity in African countries; therefore, the authors recommend the development and implementation of a harmonized and contextualized method for the assessment of biosecurity in livestock farms in Africa.

Indexed as

Animal DiseasesAnimal HusbandryBiosecurityLivestockAfricaAnimalsFarms

Identifiers

PMID40303185
PMCPMC12016981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.