口蹄疫诊断检测的效率和效果评估:在东南亚,口蹄疫新型诊断检测比传统检测更可行吗?

IF 1.3 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Australian Veterinary Journal Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1111/avj.13376
W Y Tan, M P Ward
{"title":"口蹄疫诊断检测的效率和效果评估:在东南亚,口蹄疫新型诊断检测比传统检测更可行吗?","authors":"W Y Tan, M P Ward","doi":"10.1111/avj.13376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Foot and mouth disease (FMD) remains endemic in many areas of continental Southeast Asia (SEA). It is responsible for substantial economic losses in the smallholder sector and threatens livelihoods. In recent years, novel diagnostic tests have been developed which reportedly detect FMD virus more effectively and efficiently. This critically appraised topic (CAT) aimed to evaluate the feasibility of these diagnostic tests for FMD in SEA compared to conventional tests. Relevant studies that evaluate diagnostic tests are identified and critically assessed, and recommendations are made on suitable potential diagnostic tests for use in the smallholder sector in SEA. A systematic search of electronic databases (CABI: CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collections) was carried out to identify relevant studies that compared novel and conventional diagnostic tests. The search strategy initially identified 12 papers, of which six fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and were selected for this review. Most of the selected studies had limitations in design and comparability, making it difficult to validly compare the effectiveness and efficiency of the relevant diagnostic tests. These limitations include variation in sample characteristics, methodology, measurable outcomes and the different aspects of the diagnostic tests that each study focused on. Most studies concluded that novel diagnostic tests were more effective and efficient than conventional tests: had greater analytical sensitivity and specificity, were more robust, had a wider range of processable sample types and serotypes, could detect various diseases, had faster testing speeds and provided greater value for money. However, strong recommendations on which specific diagnostic test to rely on could not be made, since there was conflicting evidence and multiple confounding factors. Overall, the evidence found did not entirely apply to the target scenario, being SEA smallholder farms. Recommendations for the target scenario were also made based on the study findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":8661,"journal":{"name":"Australian Veterinary Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of diagnostic tests for foot and mouth disease: are novel diagnostic tests for FMD more feasible than conventional tests in Southeast Asia?\",\"authors\":\"W Y Tan, M P Ward\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/avj.13376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Foot and mouth disease (FMD) remains endemic in many areas of continental Southeast Asia (SEA). It is responsible for substantial economic losses in the smallholder sector and threatens livelihoods. In recent years, novel diagnostic tests have been developed which reportedly detect FMD virus more effectively and efficiently. This critically appraised topic (CAT) aimed to evaluate the feasibility of these diagnostic tests for FMD in SEA compared to conventional tests. Relevant studies that evaluate diagnostic tests are identified and critically assessed, and recommendations are made on suitable potential diagnostic tests for use in the smallholder sector in SEA. A systematic search of electronic databases (CABI: CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collections) was carried out to identify relevant studies that compared novel and conventional diagnostic tests. The search strategy initially identified 12 papers, of which six fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and were selected for this review. Most of the selected studies had limitations in design and comparability, making it difficult to validly compare the effectiveness and efficiency of the relevant diagnostic tests. These limitations include variation in sample characteristics, methodology, measurable outcomes and the different aspects of the diagnostic tests that each study focused on. Most studies concluded that novel diagnostic tests were more effective and efficient than conventional tests: had greater analytical sensitivity and specificity, were more robust, had a wider range of processable sample types and serotypes, could detect various diseases, had faster testing speeds and provided greater value for money. However, strong recommendations on which specific diagnostic test to rely on could not be made, since there was conflicting evidence and multiple confounding factors. Overall, the evidence found did not entirely apply to the target scenario, being SEA smallholder farms. Recommendations for the target scenario were also made based on the study findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Veterinary Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Veterinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/avj.13376\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Veterinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/avj.13376","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

口蹄疫(FMD)仍在东南亚大陆(SEA)的许多地区流行。口蹄疫给小农经济造成了巨大的经济损失,并威胁着人们的生计。据报道,近年来开发的新型诊断测试可更有效、更高效地检测口蹄疫病毒。本严格评审专题(CAT)旨在评估与传统检测方法相比,这些诊断检测方法对东南亚地区口蹄疫的可行性。对评估诊断检测的相关研究进行了鉴定和严格评估,并就东南亚地区小农部门可能使用的合适诊断检测提出了建议。对电子数据库(CABI:CAB Abstracts、Web of Science Core Collections)进行了系统搜索,以确定比较新型诊断测试和传统诊断测试的相关研究。搜索策略初步确定了 12 篇论文,其中 6 篇符合所有纳入标准,被选入本综述。所选研究大多在设计和可比性方面存在局限性,因此很难对相关诊断测试的有效性和效率进行有效比较。这些局限性包括样本特征、方法、可测量的结果以及每项研究重点关注的诊断测试的不同方面存在差异。大多数研究认为,新型诊断检测比传统检测更有效、更高效:分析灵敏度和特异性更高,更可靠,可处理的样本类型和血清型更广泛,可检测各种疾病,检测速度更快,性价比更高。然而,由于存在相互矛盾的证据和多种干扰因素,因此无法就依赖哪种特定诊断检测做出有力的建议。总体而言,所发现的证据并不完全适用于目标情景,即 SEA 小农农场。根据研究结果,还提出了针对目标情景的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of diagnostic tests for foot and mouth disease: are novel diagnostic tests for FMD more feasible than conventional tests in Southeast Asia?

Foot and mouth disease (FMD) remains endemic in many areas of continental Southeast Asia (SEA). It is responsible for substantial economic losses in the smallholder sector and threatens livelihoods. In recent years, novel diagnostic tests have been developed which reportedly detect FMD virus more effectively and efficiently. This critically appraised topic (CAT) aimed to evaluate the feasibility of these diagnostic tests for FMD in SEA compared to conventional tests. Relevant studies that evaluate diagnostic tests are identified and critically assessed, and recommendations are made on suitable potential diagnostic tests for use in the smallholder sector in SEA. A systematic search of electronic databases (CABI: CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collections) was carried out to identify relevant studies that compared novel and conventional diagnostic tests. The search strategy initially identified 12 papers, of which six fulfilled all the inclusion criteria and were selected for this review. Most of the selected studies had limitations in design and comparability, making it difficult to validly compare the effectiveness and efficiency of the relevant diagnostic tests. These limitations include variation in sample characteristics, methodology, measurable outcomes and the different aspects of the diagnostic tests that each study focused on. Most studies concluded that novel diagnostic tests were more effective and efficient than conventional tests: had greater analytical sensitivity and specificity, were more robust, had a wider range of processable sample types and serotypes, could detect various diseases, had faster testing speeds and provided greater value for money. However, strong recommendations on which specific diagnostic test to rely on could not be made, since there was conflicting evidence and multiple confounding factors. Overall, the evidence found did not entirely apply to the target scenario, being SEA smallholder farms. Recommendations for the target scenario were also made based on the study findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Veterinary Journal
Australian Veterinary Journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
85
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Over the past 80 years, the Australian Veterinary Journal (AVJ) has been providing the veterinary profession with leading edge clinical and scientific research, case reports, reviews. news and timely coverage of industry issues. AJV is Australia''s premier veterinary science text and is distributed monthly to over 5,500 Australian Veterinary Association members and subscribers.
期刊最新文献
Joseph O'BRIEN 1927-2022. A case report of Penicillium chorioretinitis in a Border Collie dog. Characteristics and outcome of 73 dogs with iron EDTA molluscicide ingestion in Melbourne, Australia (2013-2019). Effects of age on accuracy of advanced imaging modalities in identifying intervertebral disc extrusions in Dachshunds. Correction to "Cervical intervertebral disc disease in 307 small-breed dogs (2000-2021): Breed-characteristic features and disc-associated vertebral instability".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1