Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42339104›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in veterinary science2026

A scoping review of farm-level biosecurity measure effectiveness against foot-and-mouth disease to inform planning and preparedness efforts in the United States.

MaRyka R Smith, Christy J Hanthorn, Michael W Sanderson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

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

3 authors.

MaRyka R SmithCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Christy J HanthornCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Michael W SandersonCenter for Outcomes Research and Epidemiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD) is a global threat to cloven-hooved livestock and wildlife species. The causative agent, Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus (FMDV) can be transmitted via aerosols, droplets, and fomites including humans. This makes the need for biosecurity measures that interrupt FMDV transmission during an outbreak critical. However, quantitative data supporting the effectiveness of many recommended biosecurity measures is limited. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify peer-reviewed literature that described or evaluated biosecurity practices to mitigate FMD risk at the farm level in order to inform planning and preparedness efforts in the United States. Methods: A systematic search of four databases identified 3,153 unique records. Included reports had to be original, peer-reviewed research, published in English, include information about a biosecurity measure applied at the farm level to mitigate FMD risk, and address at least one major domestic livestock species in the United States (cattle, sheep, goat, swine, American bison). Reports describing results generated entirely Results: 22 reports were included in this review describing data from 16 (one unreported) unique countries published between 1998 and 2024. Two reports describing experimental studies evaluated handwashing, showering, and changing outerwear, which were found to have variable efficacy. The use of biosecurity measures applied to livestock and their products, personnel and visitors, vehicles and fomites, and disinfection were identified from 20 field reports and observational studies. No biosecurity measures that appeared in more than one report were identified as being consistently effective at mitigating disease risk in a field setting. Discussion: The inconsistent and limited evidence to support the effectiveness of specific biosecurity measures in field settings identified through this review makes meta-analysis infeasible at this time and hampers the ability of animal health officials and animal caretakers to plan for and respond appropriately during an FMD outbreak. Improved reporting of biosecurity measure implementation would improve our ability to assess their effectiveness and develop evidence-based biosecurity recommendations for FMD preparedness and response plans.

Indexed as

biosecuritycattlefoot-and-mouth diseasegoatscoping reviewsheepswine

Identifiers

PMID42339104
PMCPMC13284146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.