Review state-of-the-art of output-based methodological approaches for substantiating freedom from infection.

freedom-from-infection infectious-diseases output-based prevalence surveillance

Journal

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
Titre abrégé: Front Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101666658

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2024
Historique:
received: 13 11 2023
accepted: 29 02 2024
medline: 29 3 2024
pubmed: 29 3 2024
entrez: 29 3 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

A wide variety of control and surveillance programmes that are designed and implemented based on country-specific conditions exists for infectious cattle diseases that are not regulated. This heterogeneity renders difficult the comparison of probabilities of freedom from infection estimated from collected surveillance data. The objectives of this review were to outline the methodological and epidemiological considerations for the estimation of probabilities of freedom from infection from surveillance information and review state-of-the-art methods estimating the probabilities of freedom from infection from heterogeneous surveillance data. Substantiating freedom from infection consists in quantifying the evidence of absence from the absence of evidence. The quantification usually consists in estimating the probability of observing no positive test result, in a given sample, assuming that the infection is present at a chosen (low) prevalence, called the design prevalence. The usual surveillance outputs are the sensitivity of surveillance and the probability of freedom from infection. A variety of factors influencing the choice of a method are presented; disease prevalence context, performance of the tests used, risk factors of infection, structure of the surveillance programme and frequency of testing. The existing methods for estimating the probability of freedom from infection are scenario trees, Bayesian belief networks, simulation methods, Bayesian prevalence estimation methods and the STOC free model. Scenario trees analysis is the current reference method for proving freedom from infection and is widely used in countries that claim freedom. Bayesian belief networks and simulation methods are considered extensions of scenario trees. They can be applied to more complex surveillance schemes and represent complex infection dynamics. Bayesian prevalence estimation methods and the STOC free model allow freedom from infection estimation at the herd-level from longitudinal surveillance data, considering risk factor information and the structure of the population. Comparison of surveillance outputs from heterogeneous surveillance programmes for estimating the probability of freedom from infection is a difficult task. This paper is a 'guide towards substantiating freedom from infection' that describes both all assumptions-limitations and available methods that can be applied in different settings.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38550781
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1337661
pmc: PMC10977073
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

1337661

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Meletis, Conrady, Hopp, Lurier, Frössling, Rosendal, Faverjon, Carmo, Hodnik, Ózsvári, Kostoulas, van Schaik, Comin, Nielen, Knific, Schulz, Šerić-Haračić, Fourichon, Santman-Berends and Madouasse.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

CFa was employed by Ausvet Europe. IS-B was employed by Royal GD. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Auteurs

Eleftherios Meletis (E)

Department of Public and One Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Karditsa, Greece.

Beate Conrady (B)

Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Complexity Science Hub Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Petter Hopp (P)

Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Ås, Norway.

Thibaut Lurier (T)

Université de Lyon, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR EPIA, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Université Clermont Auvergne, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR EPIA, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.

Jenny Frössling (J)

Department of Disease Control and Epidemiology, National Veterinary Institute (SVA) Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Skara, Sweden.

Thomas Rosendal (T)

Department of Disease Control and Epidemiology, National Veterinary Institute (SVA) Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden.

Céline Faverjon (C)

Ausvet Europe, Lyon, France.

Luís Pedro Carmo (LP)

Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Ås, Norway.
Veterinary Public Health Institute, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Jaka Jakob Hodnik (JJ)

Clinic for Reproduction and Large Animals-Section for Ruminants, Veterinary Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

László Ózsvári (L)

Department of Veterinary Forensics and Economics, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, Budapest, Hungary.

Polychronis Kostoulas (P)

Department of Public and One Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Karditsa, Greece.

Gerdien van Schaik (G)

Royal GD, Deventer, Netherlands.
Department of Population Health Sciences, Unit Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Arianna Comin (A)

Department of Disease Control and Epidemiology, National Veterinary Institute (SVA) Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden.

Mirjam Nielen (M)

Department of Population Health Sciences, Unit Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Tanja Knific (T)

Institute of Food Safety, Feed and Environment, Veterinary Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Jana Schulz (J)

Institute of Epidemiology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, Greifswald, Germany.

Sabina Šerić-Haračić (S)

Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Christine Fourichon (C)

Oniris, INRAE, BIOEPAR, Nantes, France.

Inge Santman-Berends (I)

Royal GD, Deventer, Netherlands.
Department of Population Health Sciences, Unit Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Aurélien Madouasse (A)

Oniris, INRAE, BIOEPAR, Nantes, France.

Classifications MeSH