Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42340930›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

A simulation-based approach to strengthen chronic wasting disease surveillance in captive cervid populations.

Lauren Wakefield, Alan Cain, Chris Cerny, Hunter Reed, Aniruddha V Belsare

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

5 authors.

Lauren WakefieldAuburn University College of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn, Alabama, United States of America.
Alan CainTexas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Chris CernyTexas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Hunter ReedTexas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Aniruddha V BelsareAuburn University College of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment, Auburn, Alabama, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4651-0116

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Captive cervid facilities are at elevated risk for chronic wasting disease (CWD) due to high deer densities, close animal contact, environmental contamination, and frequent movement of deer between facilities and across regions. Once CWD becomes established, it spreads quickly and is nearly impossible to eliminate, making early detection critical. However, surveillance in captive herds is challenging: testing only a small portion of the herd during the early stages of CWD outbreak provides a low likelihood of detecting infected deer. Moreover, not detecting CWD in a small sample cannot be interpreted as proof that the facility is free of CWD unless the entire herd is tested using a diagnostic test with 100% sensitivity. We developed a simulation-based approach to interpret surveillance results when CWD is not detected in the sampled subset of animals within captive cervid facilities. This simulation-based approach is retrospective in nature. By integrating deer demographic data, individual movement histories, and past CWD testing records, this tool estimates facility-level CWD detection probabilities, providing a clearer assessment of the likelihood of undetected disease within a facility. Using data from 23 captive cervid facilities in Texas, we demonstrate how this tool can support risk-based monitoring and help wildlife agencies prioritize surveillance and management efforts where they are most needed.

Indexed as

DeerWasting Disease, ChronicAnimalsComputer SimulationFemalePopulation SurveillanceTexas

Identifiers

PMID42340930
PMCPMC13293428

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.