Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41296778›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025

Benefit-cost analysis of raccoon rabies control in Ontario, Canada.

Stephanie A Shwiff, Emily S Acheson, Levi Altringer, Patrick A Leighton, Larissa Nituch, Sarah Sykora, François Viard, Tore Buchanan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Stephanie A ShwiffUSDA APHIS Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9065-9017
Emily S AchesonResearch Group on Epidemiology of Zoonoses and Public Health (GREZOSP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada.
Levi AltringerUSDA APHIS Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.
Patrick A LeightonResearch Group on Epidemiology of Zoonoses and Public Health (GREZOSP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada.
Larissa NituchWildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Trent University, Peterborough, Canada.
Sarah SykoraUSDA APHIS Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.
François ViardResearch Group on Epidemiology of Zoonoses and Public Health (GREZOSP), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montréal, Saint-Hyacinthe, Canada.
Tore BuchananWildlife Research and Monitoring Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Trent University, Peterborough, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Zoonotic diseases, particularly those originating in wildlife, pose significant public health and economic risks. Rabies, a viral zoonosis with near-100% case fatality in humans, is a prime example of such a threat, especially in regions like North America where wildlife-such as raccoons-serve as key reservoirs. This study assesses the economic efficiency of Ontario, Canada's raccoon rabies control program, which combines oral rabies vaccination (ORV), trap-vaccinate-release (TVR), and surveillance strategies. Using a spatial agent-based epidemiological model, the study estimates the benefits and costs of intervention compared to a no-intervention scenario over the period 2015-2025. Benefits were quantified as avoided public health costs, including post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), animal testing (AT), and human exposure investigations (INVT), and converted to 2023 CAD. Results show that the intervention prevented significant economic losses, with benefit-cost ratios ranging from 1.5 to 14.16 depending on assumed rates of intervention necessity, confirming the program's cost-effectiveness. This analysis not only supports continued investment in wildlife rabies control but also provides a scalable economic framework for other zoonotic disease management programs utilizing a One Health approach.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisRabiesRabies VaccinesRaccoonsAnimalsAnimals, WildHumansOntarioPost-Exposure ProphylaxisVaccinationZoonosesRabies Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID41296778
PMCPMC12704859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.