|KNIGHT-JONES, T.J.D - International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) - Zambia|
|ROBINSON, L. - Insight Editing London|
|CHARLESTON, B. - The Pirbright Institute|
|SUMPTION, K.J. - Food And Agriculture Organization Of The United Nations-European Commission For The Control Of Foot|
|VOSLOO, W. - Australian Animal Health|
Submitted to: Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
Publication Type: Review Article
Publication Acceptance Date: 4/7/2016
Publication Date: 4/7/2016
Citation: Knight-Jones, T., Robinson, L., Charleston, B., Rodriguez, L.L., Gay, C.G., Sumption, K., Vosloo, W. 2016. Global foot-and-mouth disease reearch update and gap analysis: 2 - epidemiology, wildlife and economics. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases. 63:14-29. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12522.
Interpretive Summary: We assessed knowledge gaps in foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) research, and in this study, we consider (i) epidemiology, (ii) wildlife and (iii) economics. The study took the form of a literature review (2011–2015) combined with research updates collected in 2014 from 33 institutes from across the world. Findings were used to identify priority areas for future FMD research. During 2011–2015, modelling studies were dominant in the broad field of epidemiology; however, continued efforts are required to develop robust models for use during outbreaks in FMD-free countries, linking epidemiologic and economics models. More guidance is needed for both the evaluation and the setting of targets for vaccine coverage, population immunity and vaccine field efficacy. Similarly, methods for seroprevalence studies need to be improved to obtain more meaningful outputs that allow comparison across studies. To inform control programmes in endemic countries, field trials assessing the effectiveness of vaccination in extensive smallholder systems should be performed to determine whether FMD can be controlled with quality vaccines in settings where implementing effective biosecurity is challenging. Studies need to go beyond measuring only vaccine effects and should extend our knowledge of the impact of FMD and increase our understanding of how to maximize farmer participation in disease control. Where wildlife reservoirs of virus exist, particularly African Buffalo, we need to better understand when and under what circumstances transmission to domestic animals occurs in order to manage this risk appropriately, considering the impact of control measures on livelihoods and wildlife. For settings where FMD eradication is unfeasible, further ground testing of commodity-based trade is recommended. A thorough review of global FMD control programmes, covering successes and failures, would be extremely valuable and could be used to guide other control programmes.
Technical Abstract: In 2014, the Global Foot-and-mouth disease Research ings in the fields of (i) epidemiology, (ii) wildlife and (iii) Alliance (GFRA) conducted a gap analysis of foot-and- economics. Although the three sections, epidemiology, wildlife and economics are presented as separate entities, the fields are closely linked. The role of wildlife in FMD maintenance and transmission is an important aspect of FMD epidemiology. Furthermore, our need to understand FMD epidemiology is not driven by academic interest; ultimately, financial outcomes are often the outcomes of interest rather than number of cases, and economics determines our ability to influence the disease’s epidemiology and vice versa. The study consists of the following four sections for each field: 1. Research priorities identified in the 2010 GFRA gap analysis (wildlife and economics were not specifically covered in the 2010 gap analysis). 2. Results from a literature review of FMD research published between 1 June 2011 and 31 October 2015. 3. Ongoing research reported by institutions, assessed June 2014. 4. Research priorities updated in the light of the above findings. Background information, including review methods, is presented in the series overview paper (part 1), which includes a glossary (Table S2).