Generic approaches for Risk Assessment of Infectious animal Disease introduction (G‐RAID)

Abstract

The objective of the G-RAID project was the mutual exchange of knowledge between the consortium members on the development of generic risk assessment (RA) tools for animal disease incursion. Seven generic RA tools were compared considering objectives, inputs, algorithms and outputs. All tools were designed for rapid risk assessment and could assess the incursion risk for multiple diseases and pathways. Specific objectives of the tools, however, varied from immediate response to new disease events to prioritization of diseases and horizon scanning, resulting in different approaches to evaluate the incursion risk of infectious animal diseases. Cross-validation was explored as a method to validate the generic RA tools. All tools were applied to a case study for African swine fever (ASF) in which the incursion risk for the Netherlands and Finland was assessed for the 2017 situation and two hypothetical scenarios with ASF cases reported in Germany. The generic RA tools were parameterized using the same global databases for disease occurrence and trade in live animals and animal products. Diseaserelated parameters, however, could not be standardized because of the different levels of detail included in the model calculations. A comparison of absolute results of the tools was not possible, because output parameters represented different endpoints, varied from qualitative probability levels to quantitative numbers, and were expressed in different units. Therefore, relative risks across countries and scenarios were calculated for each tool and compared. The risk assessment tools largely agreed upon the ranking of countries and scenarios based on relative risks and would thus indicate similar priorities for risk management As such, the cross-validation increased the credibility of results obtained with the generic RA tools. The cross-validation also contributed to the internal validation and further development of the tools. Results from the G-RAID project were disseminated to risk assessors and risk managers at a oneday symposium.

Assessing the use of animal health platforms: User’s needs, preferences and constraints

“…Risk analysis tools are key for decision makers and policy developments when there is a disease incursion. Owing to the lack of relevant data and the very short period of time usually allowed to assess animal health risk on particular topics (Sharma & Baldock, 1999;Vos et al, 2019), many institutions use a qualitative risk method for evaluating animal health risks or crises (Dufour et al, 2011). Results of this survey show an agreement with this point, where as previously mentioned many respondent's had problems in obtaining and acquiring data and thus, 70% of the respondents working in the risk analysis field who answered this survey use a qualitative risk assessment approach.…”

“…Moreover, nations contribute to those global animal health information systems as members. Sharma and Baldock, (1999) described them as: 'the complete system responsible for handling information about the health of livestock on a country'. The preference of these over national animal systems is most likely due that different countries have different animal information systems, and also access may be restricted by data protection issues or constrained by political or trade implications.…”

Assessing the use of animal health platforms: user’s needs, preferences and constraints

“…This is consistent with the three most important features they require of a risk analysis platform: a spread assessment, pathways of introduction of a disease up to the border and a quick risk assessment. Further, this corresponds to the fact that scientific panels must often make their assessment over a very short time period, from a couple of days to a few weeks (De Vos et al, 2019;Sharma & Baldock, 1999). Moreover, most commonly, risk assessments are developed to assess the risk for a single disease and risk introduction pathway (De Vos et al, 2019).…”

“…Thus, different risk analysis tools have been created, each with different functions or objectives. Examples of such: i) MINTRISK, Method for INTegrated RISK assessment of vector-borne diseases, by Wageningen University & Research (MINTRISK, 2015); ii) SVARRA (De Vos et al, 2019), Rapid Risk Assessment tool for introduction of exotic disease to the Swedish animal population, and iii) SPARE (2020), Development of a Spatial risk assessment framework for Assessing exotic disease incuRsion through Europe (United Kingdom, Defra).…”