ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Current approaches in livestock geotagging: Assessing available technologies and applications to public health research in Kenya and Malawi.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Livestock geotrackers are increasingly used for public health research, particularly within the field of One Health, to draw inference on pathogen exposure and human risk from livestock movement data. There are many dozens, if not hundreds, of devices available to researchers, including devices purpose built for livestock such as collars, ear tags, rumen boluses (placed in the forestomach of a ruminant), or other formats; those intended for wildlife but suitable for livestock; and devices intended for other geotracking applications which can be retrofitted for livestock. To assist other researchers in navigating the wealth of available options, we present here our experiences with six devices-four intended for livestock, one intended for wildlife, and one intended for humans- applied to cattle, camels, sheep, goats, and donkeys in rural locations in Eastern and Southern Africa. We summarize the technical specifications and features of these devices, our deployment strategies, and our experiences in terms of battery life, durability, data quality and retrieval, and acceptability by livestock owners. We found that both FindMy and CatLog2 performed well and were cost-effective at under $250 per unit. While FindMy is more costly than CatLog2, this device transmits signal, allowing users to track device locations from an app or browser. Our results support other One Health researchers weighing the hundreds of options for livestock geotracking available to them, considering their project's context, objectives, and available resources.
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.