ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
Personal biosecurity among livestock producers and veterinarians in Armenia and the Republic of Moldova.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Livestock producers and veterinarians are at high risk of zoonotic disease exposure, yet protective practices are often inconsistent. Cross-sectional surveys were conducted in Armenia (387 livestock producers and 113 veterinarians) and the Republic of Moldova (373 livestock producers and 100 veterinarians). To analyze how education, knowledge, and risk perceptions influence personal biosecurity practices, specifically the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), descriptive statistics and multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) were employed. The findings revealed gaps in awareness and the implementation of preventive measures, including not using PPE to handle abortion materials or carcass disposal. In addition, risky behaviors such as feeding viscera to pets and selling unpasteurized milk were common. Although 40% of livestock producers reported having no formal training on zoonotic diseases, more than 80% indicated that they would like to learn more about the subject. Veterinarians' results reflected compliance with hygiene standards and a commitment to using PPE and implementing biosecurity measures. Additionally, greater self-reported knowledge on zoonotic diseases was associated with improved hygiene and more appropriate use of PPE in specific situations. The study underscores the critical role of education and effective communication between livestock producers and veterinarians in promoting safe practices. Addressing these gaps requires context-specific training and awareness, provision of affordable PPE, and institutional strengthening of veterinary services, framed within a One Health approach.
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.