Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40690450›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Bovine tuberculosis model validation against a field study of badger vaccination with selective culling.

Graham C Smith, Richard Budgey

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Graham C SmithNational Wildlife Management Centre, WOAH Collaborating Centre in Risk Analysis and Modelling, Animal and Plant Health Agency, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9897-6794
Richard BudgeyNational Wildlife Management Centre, WOAH Collaborating Centre in Risk Analysis and Modelling, Animal and Plant Health Agency, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9938-2584

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is a costly disease in Britain and Ireland shared by cattle and badgers (Meles meles), and to reduce the infection in cattle to low levels some form of badger management is considered necessary. We compare the results of a badger field trial where test-positive badgers are culled, and test-negative badgers vaccinated (a TVR approach) with the results of the simulation model originally used to predict the effect of the trial in Northern Ireland. Initial model results depended strongly on whether social perturbation occurred in the badger population following culling, and the field study demonstrated no evidence for such behavior. Here we re-run the model with the initial conditions of the TVR study and with no social perturbation and predict a similar outcome in terms of number of badgers caught, number testing positive, and the substantial decline in prevalence. These results validate our model and demonstrate the utility of such predictive modelling for this disease system. This is particularly important as the UK government moves away from widespread badger culling in England toward more vaccination, as this combined approach of vaccination and selective culling based on test results may give a more robust method of disease management than just vaccination on its own.

Indexed as

Animal CullingMustelidaeTuberculosis, BovineVaccinationAnimalsCattleMycobacterium bovisUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID40690450
PMCPMC12279149

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.