Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42135587›Full record

ArticleEcoHealth2026

Pet-Wildlife Interactions Near Ghana's National Parks: Conservation and Health Risks.

Eric Adjei Lawer, Jesse Kwakuduah Cadbury

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in EcoHealth, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Eric Adjei LawerDepartment of Biodiversity Conservation and Management, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana. ladjei@uds.edu.gh.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9480-7961
Jesse Kwakuduah CadburyDepartment of Biodiversity Conservation and Management, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Domestic cats and dogs are the most widely distributed animals associated with humans. They influence wildlife mortality through predation. Yet, little is known about their impacts in the protected landscapes of many African countries. We investigated the relationship between pet husbandry practices and wildlife predation within Ghanaian communities adjacent to protected areas to fill this knowledge gap using a mixed-methods approach. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise information on pet demography and husbandry practices, while generalised linear models were used to examine predictors of pet predation on wildlife. We found that most cats and dogs had unrestricted outdoor access, were provided rationed food, and were undewormed and unvaccinated. Predation on wildlife was significantly higher in cats than in dogs. Notably, pet age significantly influenced bird predation but showed no effect for reptiles. Pets fed rationed food were more likely to prey on wildlife than those fed ad libitum. Thus, poor feeding practices and unrestricted outdoor access increased the likelihood of predation and exposure to pathogens. Our findings underscore the need for integrated strategies (e.g. education and improved husbandry practices) under a One Health framework to mitigate impacts on wildlife and zoonotic diseases of public health concern in protected landscapes.

Indexed as

Husbandry practicesPredationProtected areaPublic healthZoonoses

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.