↓ Skip to main content

A Comparative Assessment of the Risks of Introduction and Spread of Foot-and-Mouth Disease among Different Pig Sectors in Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Comparative Assessment of the Risks of Introduction and Spread of Foot-and-Mouth Disease among Different Pig Sectors in Australia
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2016.00085
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marta Hernández-Jover, Nicole Schembri, Patricia K. Holyoake, Jenny-Ann L. M. L. Toribio, Peter Anthony Julian Martin

Abstract

Small-scale pig producers are believed to pose higher biosecurity risks for the introduction and spread of exotic diseases than commercial pig producers. However, the magnitude of these risks is poorly understood. This study is a comparative assessment of the risk of introduction and spread of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) through different sectors of the pig industry: (1) large-scale pig producers; (2) small-scale producers (<100 sows) selling at saleyards and abattoirs; and (3) small-scale producers selling through informal means. An exposure and consequence assessments were conducted using the World Organization for Animal Health methodology for risk analysis, assuming FMD virus was introduced into Australia through illegal importation of infected meat. A quantitative assessment, using scenario trees and Monte Carlo stochastic simulation, was used to calculate the probabilities of exposure and spread. Input data for these assessments were obtained from a series of data gathering exercises among pig producers, industry statistics, and literature. Findings of this study suggest there is an Extremely low probability of exposure (8.69 × 10(-6) to 3.81 × 10(-5)) for the three sectors of the pig industry, with exposure through direct swill feeding being 10-100 times more likely to occur than through contact with infected feral pigs. Spread of FMD from the index farm is most likely to occur through movement of contaminated fomites, pigs, and ruminants. The virus is more likely to spread from small-scale piggeries selling at saleyards and abattoirs than from other piggeries. The most influential factors on the spread of FMD from the index farm is the ability of the farmer to detect FMD, the probability of FMD spread through contaminated fomites and the presence of ruminants on the farm. Although small-scale producers selling informally move animals less frequently and do not use external staff, movement of pigs to non-commercial pathways could jeopardize animal traceability in the event of a disease outbreak. This study suggests that producers' awareness on and engagement with legislative and industry requirements in relation to biosecurity and emergency animal disease management needs to be improved. Results from this study could be used by decision-makers to prioritize resource allocation for improving animal biosecurity in the pig industry.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 18 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 21 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 July 2022.
All research outputs
#799,112
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#152
of 6,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,424
of 321,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#5
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.