ReviewEcoHealth2026
Rift Valley Fever at the Crossroads of Ecology Mobility and Fragmented Health Governance.
Review in EcoHealth, 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
Rift Valley fever (RVF) remains one of the most recognisable yet persistently elusive zoonotic diseases in Africa, despite decades of scientific advances in virology, epidemiology, and early warning. While RVF dynamics are well characterised in eco-epidemiological terms, its continued emergence, amplification, and persistence suggest that biological complexity alone does not fully explain ongoing transmission patterns. This review adopts a socio-ecological One Health systems perspective to examine how interactions between eco-epidemiological processes, livestock mobility, and health governance structures shape RVF risk. Drawing on an integrative synthesis of interdisciplinary literature, it conceptualises RVF dynamics as arising from three interconnected domains: biological risk generation, spatial redistribution through mobility and trade systems, and institutional response through governance architectures. The analysis highlights a fundamental misalignment across these domains. Ecological signals and animal health indicators often precede outbreaks but are not translated into timely action; livestock mobility redistributes risk across regions beyond the reach of nationally bounded response systems; and governance arrangements remain fragmented, with no single institution holding end-to-end responsibility. As a result, RVF response remains largely reactive and case-triggered despite the availability of predictive tools and preventive interventions. Addressing this persistent gap requires a shift from reactive, case-chasing response toward anticipatory, integrated governance that aligns ecological intelligence, mobility-informed risk management, and coordinated cross-sectoral action. Viewing RVF through this systems lens underscores that its persistence reflects less a failure of knowledge than a failure of alignment between the systems through which risk is generated, redistributed, and governed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42886437What 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.