Dataset Information

Infectious Wildlife Diseases in Austria-A Literature Review From 1980 Until 2017.

ABSTRACT: This literature review examines infectious wildlife disease research in Austria. We analyzed 226 research papers, published between 1980 and 2017. We determined that wildlife disease papers increased significantly from 0.8 ± 0.8 publications per year in the first decade (1980-1989) when compared to 2008-2017 with an average of 12.9 ± 4.1 publications per year. We illustrate information about the most investigated diseases and highlight the lack of research into certain wildlife pathogens. A special emphasis was given to diseases with zoonotic potential. The review showed that research focused on a few select species like the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), red deer (Cervus elaphus), and wild boar (Sus scrofa), all game species. Moreover, diseases affecting livestock and human health were seen more often. The review also found that only a low number of publications actually stated disease prevalence and confidence interval data. The reported diseases identified were classified according to their notifiable status and the distribution at the wildlife-human and wildlife-livestock interface. Furthermore, we try to argue why research into some diseases is prioritized, and why other diseases are underrepresented in current Austrian research. While spatiotemporal indicators could not be assessed due to the variability in methodologies and objectives of various studies, the information provided by this review offers the first comprehensive evaluation of the status of infectious wildlife disease research in Austria. Therefore, this study could assist investigators to identify further areas of priorities for research and conservation efforts and for wildlife management professionals to inform policy and funding strategies. With this review, we want to encourage research in the field of wildlife diseases in Austria to enhance current knowledge in the prevention of further loss in biodiversity and to find new measures to promote "One Health" on a global scale.

SUBMITTER: Trimmel NE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7046627 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Infectious Wildlife Diseases in Austria-A Literature Review From 1980 Until 2017.

Trimmel Nina Eva NE Walzer Chris C

Frontiers in veterinary science 20200221

This literature review examines infectious wildlife disease research in Austria. We analyzed 226 research papers, published between 1980 and 2017. We determined that wildlife disease papers increased significantly from 0.8 ± 0.8 publications per year in the first decade (1980-1989) when compared to 2008-2017 with an average of 12.9 ± 4.1 publications per year. We illustrate information about the most investigated diseases and highlight the lack of research into certain wildlife pathogens. A spec ...[more]

PMID: 32154271

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Timely notification of infectious diseases is crucial for prompt response by public health services. Adequate notification systems facilitate timely notification. A systematic literature review was performed to assess outcomes of studies on notification timeliness and to determine which aspects of notification systems are associated with timely notification. METHODOLOGY:Articles reviewing timeliness of notifications published between 2000 and 2017 were searched in Pubmed and Scopus. Using a standardized notification chain, timeliness of reporting system for each article was defined as either sufficient (≥ 80% notifications in time), partly sufficient (≥ 50-80%), or insufficient (< 50%) according to the article's predefined timeframe, a standardized timeframe for all articles, and a disease specific timeframe. Electronic notification systems were compared with conventional methods (postal mail, fax, telephone, email) and mobile phone reporting. RESULTS:48 articles were identified. In almost one third of the studies with a predefined timeframe (39), timeliness of notification systems was either sufficient or insufficient (11/39, 28% and 12/39, 31% resp.). Applying the standardized timeframe (45 studies) revealed similar outcomes (13/45, 29%, sufficient notification timeframe, vs 15/45, 33%, insufficient). The disease specific timeframe was not met by any study. Systems involving reporting by laboratories most often complied sufficiently with predefined or standardized timeframes. Outcomes were not related to electronic, conventional notification systems or mobile phone reporting. Electronic systems were faster in comparative studies (10/13); this hardly resulted in sufficient timeliness, neither according to predefined nor to standardized timeframes. CONCLUSION:A minority of notification systems meets either predefined, standardized or disease specific timeframes. Systems including laboratory reporting are associated with timely notification. Electronic systems reduce reporting delay, but implementation needs considerable effort to comply with notification timeframes. During outbreak threats, patient, doctors and laboratory testing delays need to be reduced to achieve timely detection and notification. Public health authorities should incorporate procedures for this in their preparedness plans.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has increased the importance of the deployment of digital detection surveillance systems to support early warning and monitoring of infectious diseases. These opportunities create a "double-edge sword," as the ethical governance of such approaches often lags behind technological achievements.ObjectiveThe aim was to investigate ethical issues identified from utilizing artificial intelligence-augmented surveillance or early warning systems to monitor and detect common or novel infectious disease outbreaks.MethodsIn a number of databases, we searched relevant articles that addressed ethical issues of using artificial intelligence, digital surveillance systems, early warning systems, and/or big data analytics technology for detecting, monitoring, or tracing infectious diseases according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and further identified and analyzed them with a theoretical framework.ResultsThis systematic review identified 29 articles presented in 6 major themes clustered under individual, organizational, and societal levels, including awareness of implementing digital surveillance, digital integrity, trust, privacy and confidentiality, civil rights, and governance. While these measures were understandable during a pandemic, the public had concerns about receiving inadequate information; unclear governance frameworks; and lack of privacy protection, data integrity, and autonomy when utilizing infectious disease digital surveillance. The barriers to engagement could widen existing health care disparities or digital divides by underrepresenting vulnerable and at-risk populations, and patients' highly sensitive data, such as their movements and contacts, could be exposed to outside sources, impinging significantly upon basic human and civil rights.ConclusionsOur findings inform ethical considerations for service delivery models for medical practitioners and policymakers involved in the use of digital surveillance for infectious disease spread, and provide a basis for a global governance structure.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021259180; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259180.

Dataset Information

Infectious Wildlife Diseases in Austria-A Literature Review From 1980 Until 2017.

Publications

Infectious Wildlife Diseases in Austria-A Literature Review From 1980 Until 2017.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets