ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Crimean-congo haemorrhagic fever virus circulates within broad ecological networks of ticks and vertebrates.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Global, High-Resolution Index of Risk and Exposure of Humans to Ticks, Lyme Borreliosis, and Crimean-Congo Haemorrhagic Fever.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
We produced spatial datasets of the known distribution of Orthonairovirus haemorrhagiae (formerly Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever virus, CCHFV) by compiling human cases, virus isolations, and serological data from humans and animals, spanning from Europe to southern Africa, with the aim of virus range modelling. Models based solely on climatic variables produced unrealistic and overly extensive predictions, overestimating suitability in northern Europe and confirming that climate alone poorly explains CCHFV range. Approaches using only tick species distributions underperformed in many parts of Africa, reflecting the complexity of vector-host interactions and the absence of a strict tick-virus association. The integration of human-biting tick distributions, livestock density, and chorotypes yielded the most robust results, accurately capturing over 90% of known occurrences, by identifying vertebrate assemblages most likely to amplify the virus while reducing the number of explanatory variables. Chorotypes, representing clusters of co-occurring hosts, enhanced model performance and improved the delineation of both the Palearctic and African ranges limits of the virus. Our results support a generalist epidemiological model in which multiple tick species, together with a broad range of vertebrate hosts, sustain CCHFV circulation. This ecological flexibility, rather than strict vector specificity, likely explains the CCHFV wide biogeographical range and occasional lineage expansions across continents. This study provides the most comprehensive assessment to date of the determinants of the distribution of CCHFV. Although gaps remain, this study demonstrates that coupling abiotic and biotic predictors provides a more accurate and ecologically meaningful understanding of CCHFV distribution.
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.