ArticleVirology journal2025
Study of the effectiveness of a supported intervention package in reducing the risk of avian influenza human exposure through the reduction of infections in poultry: Egypt, 2006-2021.
Article in Virology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFor a decade, avian influenza (AI) viruses were major concern for Egypt since they are endemic in poultry and have caused 359 human infections, accounting for 40% of cases globally. Interventions implemented before 2015 proved to have minor impact on the spread of infection. Since 2015, a Supported Intervention Package (SIP) was implemented to reduce the risk of human exposure by reducing infections in poultry. The intervention package included enhanced surveillance and laboratory capacity, early outbreak detection, and raised community awareness. This study aims to evaluate SIP's effectiveness by comparing number and rates of AI in humans and poultry before and after intervention package implementation.
methodsAI surveillance data for poultry and humans from 2006 to 2021 was obtained and linked. Human AI data include patients' demographics, clinical picture, risk factors, lab results and outcome, while poultry data include number prevent of positive specimens for AI by time and place. Confirmation performed by testing oropharyngeal swabs collected from suspected patients and poultry using RT-PCR in the affiliated laboratory. Positive rates were calculated, descriptive data analysis was performed and rate of infection was plotted against demographics and risk factors. Results compared before and after implementation of using Chi
resultsAmong all confirmed cases, 346(96.4%) reported before and 13(3.6%) after SIP implementation with no cases reported after 2017. A significant reduction in positivity rate of both human and poultry cases (2.0 vs. 0.2% and 2.4 vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001) found after 2015. Percent of housewives decreased from 30.9 to 7.7%, p < 0.05 and positive specimens' rates from backyards decreased from 61.1 to 47.9%, p < 0.001. Median days to laboratory confirmation reduced from 3.6 to 2.8 days. The genetic analysis indicated a major genetic drift occurred before 2015, possibly due to inadequate control measures.
conclusionsThe Study indicated reduced infections in humans and poultry suggesting effectiveness of SIP, which also raised community awareness as shown by reducing infections among housewives and enhancing surveillance as shown by case earlier detection. Continued coordinated efforts between human and poultry sectors are needed to contribute to the elimination of the disease in Egypt.
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.