MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213012277 · doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2021.100340

Risk factors for Rift Valley fever virus seropositivity in one-humped camels (Camelus dromedarius) and pastoralist knowledge and practices in Northern Nigeria

2021· article· en· W3213012277 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew M. Adamu, Allam Lushakyaa, A. K. B. Sackey, Alhaji Bida Nma, Philip P. Mshelbwala, Salamatu Machunga-Mambula, Sunday Idoko Idoko, Alex A. Adikwu, Wesley Daniel Nafarnda, Bello Sikiti Garba, Olajide A. Owolodun, A. A. Dzikwi, E.O. Balogun, Ayo Yila Simon

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyUniversity of British ColumbiaGovernment of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRift Valley feverPastoralismSeroprevalenceOutbreakVeterinary medicineEnvironmental healthLivestockHerdGeographyRift valleyOdds ratioTransmission (telecommunications)ZoonosisEpidemiologyLogistic regressionSocioeconomicsMedicineBiologyVirologySerologyImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a complex emerging arboviral hemorrhagic disease that causes significant illness in animals and humans. Camel trade across the land borders between Nigeria and the Niger Republic occurs frequently and poses a significant risk for RVF transmission to pastoralists and traders. We carried a cross-sectional study between November 2016 and April 2017 in two northern States (Katsina and Jigawa) known for camel trade in Nigeria to investigate the seroprevalence and potential risk factors for RVFV occurrence. We collected 720 sera and administered questionnaire to pastoralists. We used the competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (c-ELISA) to determine the previous exposure to RVFV infection. We retrieved environmental information from public data sources that might explain RVFV seropositivity at the LGA level. To asses potential risk factors,we categorized LGAs with RVFV as "1" and those without a case" 0". We fitted a logistic model to the data and estimated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. An overall 19.9% prevalence was reported among camel herd—the highest seropositivity (33.3%) was recorded in SuleTankarkar LGA. In the multivariable model, only rain-fed croplands was significantly associated with RVFV antibodies occurrence p = 0.048 (OR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.76–0.99). Only a minority of the respondents, 19.3% (n = 17/88), knew that RVF is zoonotic. Separation of healthy animals from the infected animals was carried out by 53.4% (47/88) pastoralists while 59.1% (52/88) pastoralists still use ethnoveterinary practices to control or mitigate disease outbreaks. Our study demonstrates the presence of RVFV antibodies among camel in Nigeria and the associated risk factors. These findings highlight the need for enhancing surveillance and control efforts and the public health education of camel pastoralists. Further investigation to unravel the zoonotic transmission potential to pastoralists and other animal species is pertinent.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne HealthSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207