Cargando…
Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains
Current post-epidemic sero-surveillance uses random selection of animal holdings. A better strategy may be to estimate the benefits gained by sampling each farm and use this to target selection. In this study we estimate the probability of undiscovered infection for sheep farms in Devon after the 20...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3107858/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21674022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020064 |
_version_ | 1782205255200538624 |
---|---|
author | Handel, Ian G. Bronsvoort, Barend M. de C. Forbes, John F. Woolhouse, Mark E. J. |
author_facet | Handel, Ian G. Bronsvoort, Barend M. de C. Forbes, John F. Woolhouse, Mark E. J. |
author_sort | Handel, Ian G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Current post-epidemic sero-surveillance uses random selection of animal holdings. A better strategy may be to estimate the benefits gained by sampling each farm and use this to target selection. In this study we estimate the probability of undiscovered infection for sheep farms in Devon after the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak using the combination of a previously published model of daily infection risk and a simple model of probability of discovery of infection during the outbreak. This allows comparison of the system sensitivity (ability to detect infection in the area) of arbitrary, random sampling compared to risk-targeted selection across a full range of sampling budgets. We show that it is possible to achieve 95% system sensitivity by sampling, on average, 945 farms with random sampling and 184 farms with risk-targeted sampling. We also examine the effect of ordering samples by risk to expedite return to a disease-free status. Risk ordering the sampling process results in detection of positive farms, if present, 15.6 days sooner than with randomly ordered sampling, assuming 50 farms are tested per day. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3107858 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31078582011-06-13 Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains Handel, Ian G. Bronsvoort, Barend M. de C. Forbes, John F. Woolhouse, Mark E. J. PLoS One Research Article Current post-epidemic sero-surveillance uses random selection of animal holdings. A better strategy may be to estimate the benefits gained by sampling each farm and use this to target selection. In this study we estimate the probability of undiscovered infection for sheep farms in Devon after the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease outbreak using the combination of a previously published model of daily infection risk and a simple model of probability of discovery of infection during the outbreak. This allows comparison of the system sensitivity (ability to detect infection in the area) of arbitrary, random sampling compared to risk-targeted selection across a full range of sampling budgets. We show that it is possible to achieve 95% system sensitivity by sampling, on average, 945 farms with random sampling and 184 farms with risk-targeted sampling. We also examine the effect of ordering samples by risk to expedite return to a disease-free status. Risk ordering the sampling process results in detection of positive farms, if present, 15.6 days sooner than with randomly ordered sampling, assuming 50 farms are tested per day. Public Library of Science 2011-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3107858/ /pubmed/21674022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020064 Text en Handel et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Handel, Ian G. Bronsvoort, Barend M. de C. Forbes, John F. Woolhouse, Mark E. J. Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title | Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title_full | Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title_fullStr | Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title_full_unstemmed | Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title_short | Risk-Targeted Selection of Agricultural Holdings for Post-Epidemic Surveillance: Estimation of Efficiency Gains |
title_sort | risk-targeted selection of agricultural holdings for post-epidemic surveillance: estimation of efficiency gains |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3107858/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21674022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020064 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT handeliang risktargetedselectionofagriculturalholdingsforpostepidemicsurveillanceestimationofefficiencygains AT bronsvoortbarendmdec risktargetedselectionofagriculturalholdingsforpostepidemicsurveillanceestimationofefficiencygains AT forbesjohnf risktargetedselectionofagriculturalholdingsforpostepidemicsurveillanceestimationofefficiencygains AT woolhousemarkej risktargetedselectionofagriculturalholdingsforpostepidemicsurveillanceestimationofefficiencygains |