ReviewOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026
Mapping Reported Modes of Transmission of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A (H5N1) to Humans: A Scoping Review.
Review in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 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.
- Avian influenza overview June-August 2026.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A (subtype H5N1) poses a threat to human health, and its pandemic potential emphasizes the need to better understand detailed reported transmission pathways to humans. Existing literature is outdated or lacks detailed, comprehensive analysis of the range of transmission routes and how the virus may enter the human body. Objective: To comprehensively map all reported H5N1 transmission pathways to humans, as well as viral entry routes. Methods: CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed, grey literature, and reference lists (of included studies) were searched up to October 29th, 2025, with no language restrictions. Observational studies and grey literature reporting H5N1 transmission evidence to humans were included. Two reviewers conducted duplicate screening independently (two of three reviewers per record). One reviewer completed data extraction, which was cross-verified for accuracy by a second. Findings were summarized narratively. Results: 120 sources met inclusion criteria (70 studies, 50 grey literature). Reported H5N1 transmission pathways were classified into animal-to-human (109 of 120 sources, 90.8%; including poultry-to-human in 100 sources [83.3%] and cattle-to-human in nine sources [7.5%]), environment-to-human (32 of 120 sources, 26.7%), and human-to-human (14 of 120 sources, 11.7%). Reported transmission pathways were further classified as direct or indirect contact, synthesized, and linked to suspected routes of human entry, including mucosal entry (eyes, nose, mouth), inhalation of aerosols or droplets, ingestion, and percutaneous exposure. Entry routes are biologically plausible and do not imply relative likelihood or causal attribution. Conclusions: There are multiple reported pathways of H5N1 exposure, and a single pathway may involve multiple ways to infect humans. Further research is needed to determine causal mechanisms, identify specific risk factors and measures of association, and strengthen evidence-based prevention strategies.
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.