2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2015.09.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of a network based model to simulate the between-farm transmission of the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
32
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although network studies have often been motivated by the outcome of animal movements on pathogen epidemiology (Keeling, 2005;Rautureau et al, 2012;Buttner et al, 2015;Thakur et al, 2015), the specific role of animal shipments in pathogen transmission and/or exposure has rarely been quantified, especially in the swine sector. The primary advantage of our study lies in combining epidemiology and network analysis to quantify both the impact of animal movements on pathogen prevalence within farms and the risk of areas being exposed to diseases due to between-area movements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although network studies have often been motivated by the outcome of animal movements on pathogen epidemiology (Keeling, 2005;Rautureau et al, 2012;Buttner et al, 2015;Thakur et al, 2015), the specific role of animal shipments in pathogen transmission and/or exposure has rarely been quantified, especially in the swine sector. The primary advantage of our study lies in combining epidemiology and network analysis to quantify both the impact of animal movements on pathogen prevalence within farms and the risk of areas being exposed to diseases due to between-area movements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to direct contact among farms via animal movements, indirect contact may occur between farms due to windborne propagation of aerosols and dissemination of fomites by personnel, contaminated vehicles, and feed (Alonso et al, 2014;Alvarez et al, 2016;Beam et al, 2015;Dee et al, 2014;Kim et al, 2017;Lowe et al, 2014;O'Dea et al, 2015;Pasick et al, 2014). Although the potential importance of such mechanisms in creating transmission opportunities between swine premises has been shown in experimental studies and outbreak investigations (Alonso et al, 2014;Bowman et al, 2015;Lowe et al, 2014;Pasick et al, 2014), indirect contact is less often accounted for in epidemiological models (Arruda et al, 2016;Martinez-Lopez et al, 2011;Thakur et al, 2015;Yadav et al, 2016). Models of pathogen spread in livestock populations focus primarily on animal movement and, in some cases, local spatial spread based on proximity between premises (Brooks-Pollock et al, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was shown that the new infections were driven by the trading 23 behavior, and that the removing rate determined whether the virus could survive long 24 enough to infect others. Thakur et al [14] developed an agent-based, stochastic, 25 farm-level, state transition computer simulation model with the incorporation of 26 network-structure among the swine farms for the between farm spread of porcine 27 reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus to assess the impact of contact 28 structures on between-farm transmission of PRRS virus. It was shown that scenarios 29 considering only direct contacts resulted in lower overall epidemic sizes than that for 30 scenarios in which both direct contact and indirect contact network were considered.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%