Dataset Information

Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): a systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals.

ABSTRACT: Research regarding zoonotic diseases often focuses on infectious diseases animals have given to humans. However, an increasing number of reports indicate that humans are transmitting pathogens to animals. Recent examples include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of published literature regarding reverse zoonoses and highlight the need for future work in this area.An initial broad literature review yielded 4763 titles, of which 4704 were excluded as not meeting inclusion criteria. After careful screening, 56 articles (from 56 countries over three decades) with documented human-to-animal disease transmission were included in this report.In these publications, 21 (38%) pathogens studied were bacterial, 16 (29%) were viral, 12 (21%) were parasitic, and 7 (13%) were fungal, other, or involved multiple pathogens. Effected animals included wildlife (n = 28, 50%), livestock (n = 24, 43%), companion animals (n = 13, 23%), and various other animals or animals not explicitly mentioned (n = 2, 4%). Published reports of reverse zoonoses transmission occurred in every continent except Antarctica therefore indicating a worldwide disease threat.As we see a global increase in industrial animal production, the rapid movement of humans and animals, and the habitats of humans and wild animals intertwining with great complexity, the future promises more opportunities for humans to cause reverse zoonoses. Scientific research must be conducted in this area to provide a richer understanding of emerging and reemerging disease threats. As a result, multidisciplinary approaches such as One Health will be needed to mitigate these problems.

SUBMITTER: Messenger AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3938448 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): a systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals.

Messenger Ali M AM Barnes Amber N AN Gray Gregory C GC

PloS one 20140228 2

<h4>Background</h4>Research regarding zoonotic diseases often focuses on infectious diseases animals have given to humans. However, an increasing number of reports indicate that humans are transmitting pathogens to animals. Recent examples include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of published literature regarding reverse zoonoses and highlight the need for future wor ...[more]

PMID: 24586500

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Human psittacosis, caused by Chlamydia (C.) psittaci, is likely underdiagnosed and underreported, since tests for C. psittaci are often not included in routine microbiological diagnostics. Source tracing traditionally focuses on psittacine pet birds, but recently other animal species have been gaining more attention as possible sources for human psittacosis. This review aims to provide an overview of all suspected animal sources of human psittacosis cases reported in the international literature. In addition, for each animal species the strength of evidence for zoonotic transmission was estimated. METHODS:A systematic literature search was conducted using four databases (Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and Proquest). Articles were included when there was mention of at least one human case of psittacosis and a possible animal source. Investigators independently extracted data from the included articles and estimated strength of evidence for zoonotic transmission, based on a self-developed scoring system taking into account number of human cases, epidemiological evidence and laboratory test results in human, animals, and the environment. RESULTS:Eighty articles were included, which provided information on 136 different situations of possible zoonotic transmission. The maximum score for zoonotic transmission was highest for turkeys, followed by ducks, owls, and the category 'other poultry'. Articles reporting about zoonotic transmission from unspecified birds, psittaciformes and columbiformes provided a relatively low strength of evidence. A genotypical match between human and animal samples was reported twenty-eight times, including transmission from chickens, turkeys, guinea fowl, peafowl, pigeons, ducks, geese, songbirds, parrot-like birds and owls. CONCLUSIONS:Strong evidence exists for zoonotic transmission from turkeys, chickens and ducks, in addition to the more traditionally reported parrot-like animal sources. Based on our scoring system, the evidence was generally stronger for poultry than for parrot-like birds. Psittaciformes should not be disregarded as an important source of human psittacosis, still clinicians and public health officials should include poultry and birds species other than parrots in medical history and source tracing.

Project description:Background: Zoonotic Babesia infections are an emerging public health threat globally. The geographical distribution, animal reservoirs and tick vectors vary greatly across Babesia species, and estimations of prevalence reported in works within the literature are also quite different. Better prevalence estimates and identification of moderators are needed to understand the global transmission risk of different zoonotic Babesia species, and to provide crucial background information for the diagnosis, treatment and control of zoonotic babesiosis. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the global nucleic acid prevalence of different zoonotic Babesia species in humans, animals and ticks. Relevant publications were obtained from several electronic databases and grey literature up to December 2021. Articles were included if they were published in English or Chinese and reported the nucleic acid prevalence of zoonotic Babesia species in humans, animals or ticks. The pooled estimates of prevalence were determined using a random effect model. Heterogeneity was investigated using subgroup analyses and random effect meta-regression models. Results: Of 3205 unique studies, 28 were included by the systematic review of zoonotic Babesia for humans, 79 for animals and 104 for ticks. The results showed overall pooled estimates of nucleic acid prevalence for the following: B. microti-1.93% (0.32-4.69%) in humans; B. microti-7.80% (5.25-10.77%), B. divergens-2.12% (0.73-4.08%) and B. venatorum-1.42% (0.30-3.16%) in animals; and B. microti-2.30% (1.59-3.13%), B. divergens-0.16% (0.05-0.32%), and B. venatorum-0.39% (0.26-0.54%) in questing ticks. The type of population, animal reservoir or tick vector, detecting method and continent were moderators possibly associated with heterogeneity, yet the remaining heterogeneity that was not explained was still substantial (all QE p values < 0.05). Conclusions:B. microti is the most prevalent and widely distributed zoonotic Babesia species globally. The wide range of suitable animal reservoirs and potential transmission vectors and high prevalence in animals and ticks may contribute to the worldwide distribution of B. microti. Other zoonotic Babesia species were relatively less prevalent and were reported in quite limited areas.

Project description:BackgroundAir ions are molecules of air that have become ionized-that is, they have either lost or gained an electrical charge. Past speculation has suggested that exposure to positive air ions may be harmful to one's health, while exposure to negative air ions may be associated with beneficial health effects. Air ions arise from natural sources as well as direct-current transmission lines and commercial ionizers. Several recent clinical studies have suggested therapeutic effects of air ions on various types of depression at exposure levels 10- to 1000-fold higher than most previous human studies. The aim of this study was to assess the evidence from studies of laboratory animals for beneficial or adverse effects of air ions on health.MethodsSixty-two studies (1935-2015) in nine topics areas were evaluated for quality and potential systematic bias by ARRIVE guidelines. Standardized mean differences or proportional differences between exposed and control groups were computed for 44 studies to quantitatively assess the strength of the evidence for exposure-related effects.ResultsMany of the studies were conducted before 1990 and exhibited various reporting and methodological deficiencies, including small sample size, failure to control for the influence of potential confounding variables, lack of randomized assignment to treatment groups and blinded analyses, and statistical errors relating to treating group-exposed animals as individuals. The highest quality studies consistently reported no effects of exposure on any of the endpoints examined. There were no evident dose-response relationships within or across studies.ConclusionsExperimental studies of laboratory animals exposed to positive and negative air ions for minutes to years over a five-log unit range of intensities did not suggest any consistent or reliable effects on measures of behavior, learning and memory, neurotransmitters, tracheal function, respiratory infection, cardiovascular function, reproduction and growth, carcinogenesis, or other health endpoints. These data do not provide evidence of adverse or beneficial effects of air ion exposure on health, and did not suggest any biological mechanism of interaction, except perhaps for mechanosensory stimulation of body surfaces by static electric fields at high air ion concentrations.

Project description:BackgroundThe zoonotic malaria parasite Plasmodium knowlesi has emerged across Southeast Asia and is now the main cause of malaria in humans in Malaysia. A critical priority for P. knowlesi surveillance and control is understanding whether transmission is entirely zoonotic or is also occurring through human-mosquito-human transmission.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed to evaluate existing evidence which refutes or supports the occurrence of sustained human-mosquito-human transmission of P. knowlesi. Possible evidence categories and study types which would support or refute non-zoonotic transmission were identified and ranked. A literature search was conducted on Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science using a broad search strategy to identify any possible published literature. Results were synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) framework, using vote counting to combine the evidence within specific categories.ResultsOf an initial 7,299 studies screened, 131 studies were included within this review: 87 studies of P. knowlesi prevalence in humans, 14 studies in non-human primates, 13 studies in mosquitoes, and 29 studies with direct evidence refuting or supporting non-zoonotic transmission. Overall, the evidence showed that human-mosquito-human transmission is biologically possible, but there is limited evidence of widespread occurrence in endemic areas. Specific areas of research were identified that require further attention, notably quantitative analyses of potential transmission dynamics, epidemiological and entomological surveys, and ecological studies into the sylvatic cycle of the disease.ConclusionThere are key questions about P. knowlesi that remain within the areas of research that require more attention. These questions have significant implications for malaria elimination and eradication programs. This paper considers limited but varied research and provides a methodological framework for assessing the likelihood of different transmission patterns for emerging zoonotic diseases.

Dataset Information

Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): a systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals.

Publications

Reverse zoonotic disease transmission (zooanthroponosis): a systematic review of seldom-documented human biological threats to animals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets