Where we stand on chronic wasting disease: A systematic literature review of its prevalence patterns, impacts, and management interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With high fatality and no cure, chronic wasting disease (CWD) has infected cervids in multiple regions, including the United States, Canada, Europe, and South Korea. Despite the rapid growth of literature on CWD, the full scope of its ecological, social, and economic impacts and the most effective and socially acceptable management strategies to mitigate the disease is unclear. Of 3008 initially identified published peer-reviewed papers, 134 were included in a final systematic literature review to synthesize the current knowledge on CWD transmission patterns, impacts, and the effectiveness of management interventions. The number of publications on CWD has increased steadily since 2000 with an average of six papers per year. Most papers were related to CWD prevalence (39 %), human behavior (33 %), CWD impacts (31 %), and management interventions (16 %). Environmental factors such as soil, water, and plants were identified as the most common transmission medium, with a higher prevalence rate among adult male cervids than females. Hunters showed a higher risk perception and were more likely to change hunting behavior due to CWD detection than non-hunters. Ecological impacts included the decreased survival rate accompanied by lower population growth, eventually leading to the decline of cervid populations. Culling was found to be an effective and widely implemented management strategy across countries, although it often was associated with public resistance. Despite potentially high negative economic impacts anticipated due to CWD, studies on this subject were limited. Sustained surveillance, ongoing research, and engagement of affected stakeholders will be essential for future disease control and management.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | medium |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".