ReviewVeterinary sciences2026
Integrated Hunting Strategies for African Swine Fever Control in Wild Boar: A Comparative Review of Experiences in European Continent.
Review in Veterinary sciences, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
African swine fever (ASF) has become one of the most significant transboundary animal diseases affecting countries worldwide. Wild boars play a major role in virus persistence and in local spread through geographical contiguity, while long-distance and transboundary dissemination is more commonly associated with human-mediated activities, particularly the movement of contaminated pork products and materials. Hunting is frequently considered a central tool for disease control; however, its epidemiological impact remains debated. This review comparatively analyses the approaches adopted by countries of European continent affected by ASF, paying particular attention to the role of hunting within integrated management strategies. The review examines country-specific control measures, including surveillance systems, carcass search and removal, fencing, zoning, and population reduction policies. The analysis shows that successful eradication was associated with early detection, temporary suspension of hunting in infected core areas, rapid spatial containment through fencing, and intensive passive surveillance based on systematic carcass removal. Hunting was reintroduced only after containment, as a regulated depopulation tool under strict biosecurity supervision. In contrast, where the virus was already widespread at detection and containment measures were delayed or fragmented, intensified hunting alone did not prevent endemic persistence. These findings indicate that hunting is neither inherently protective nor detrimental; rather, its effectiveness depends on timing, coordination, and integration within a structured epidemiological framework. Effective control requires combining wildlife management with surveillance, biosecurity, and clear governance.
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.