Analysing WAHIS Animal Health Immediate Notifications to Understand Global Reporting Trends and Measure Early Warning Capacities (2005–2021)

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The World Animal Health Information System (WAHIS) from the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) is an online reporting system, essential for ensuring the transparency and accuracy of global animal health. One of the WOAH’s objectives is to disseminate timely notifications to support countries’ efforts to prevent and control the spread of animal diseases. This paper describes the 3,263 exceptional events notified through immediate notifications sent to WOAH from 2005 to February 2021 and their distribution in time and space and by disease. To evaluate the timeliness of reporting, we defined and analysed two periods: the confirmation period (CT), which is the time interval between the disease onset date and the confirmation date, and the notification period (NT), defined as the interval between the disease confirmation and the date of reporting to WOAH. The results showed that (1) the number of events increased over the analysis period; (2) the events were mainly reported for domestic animals and the data provided for wildlife were limited; (3) the official source of disease introduction was often unknown when the event was reported; and (4) the global median CT value was 5 days while the global median NT value was 4 days, with a decreasing trend in both cases over the study period. Divergences were found across world regions and country income categories. This analysis provides interesting insights into the early detection capabilities and transparency of countries, globally and over time.

Related collections

Most cited references 15

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Wildlife health investigations: needs, challenges and recommendations

Marie-Pierre Ryser-Degiorgis (2013)

In a fast changing world with growing concerns about biodiversity loss and an increasing number of animal and human diseases emerging from wildlife, the need for effective wildlife health investigations including both surveillance and research is now widely recognized. However, procedures applicable to and knowledge acquired from studies related to domestic animal and human health can be on partly extrapolated to wildlife. This article identifies requirements and challenges inherent in wildlife health investigations, reviews important definitions and novel health investigation methods, and proposes tools and strategies for effective wildlife health surveillance programs. Impediments to wildlife health investigations are largely related to zoological, behavioral and ecological characteristics of wildlife populations and to limited access to investigation materials. These concerns should not be viewed as insurmountable but it is imperative that they are considered in study design, data analysis and result interpretation. It is particularly crucial to remember that health surveillance does not begin in the laboratory but in the fields. In this context, participatory approaches and mutual respect are essential. Furthermore, interdisciplinarity and open minds are necessary because a wide range of tools and knowledge from different fields need to be integrated in wildlife health surveillance and research. The identification of factors contributing to disease emergence requires the comparison of health and ecological data over time and among geographical regions. Finally, there is a need for the development and validation of diagnostic tests for wildlife species and for data on free-ranging population densities. Training of health professionals in wildlife diseases should also be improved. Overall, the article particularly emphasizes five needs of wildlife health investigations: communication and collaboration; use of synergies and triangulation approaches; investments for the long term; systematic collection of metadata; and harmonization of definitions and methods.

0 comments Cited 74 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The spread of pathogens through trade in wildlife.

Patrice Watson, Emily D Travis, A Tauer (2011)

Discussions on diseases of wildlife have generally focused on two basic models: the effect of disease on wildlife, and the role that wildlife plays in diseases affecting people or domestic animal health, welfare, economics and trade. Traditionally, wildlife professionals and conservationists have focused on the former, while most human/animal health specialists have been concerned largely with the latter. Lately, the (re-)emergence of many high-profile infectious diseases in a world with ever-increasing globalisation has led to a more holistic approach in the assessment and mitigation of health risks involving wildlife (with a concurrent expansion of literature). In this paper, the authors review the role of wildlife in the ecology of infectious disease, the staggering magnitude of the movement of wild animals and products across international borders in trade, the pathways by which they move, and the growing body of risk assessments from a multitude of disciplines. Finally, they highlight existing recommendations and offer solutions for a collaborative way forward.

0 comments Cited 27 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Global transboundry disease politics: the OIE perspective.

D.V. Lightner (2012)

Reviewed in this paper are the steps for listing or de-listing of an aquatic animal disease, the current list of OIE listed aquatic animal diseases, and the reporting requirements for listed diseases by member countries. The current OIE listed aquatic animal diseases includes two diseases of amphibians, nine of fish, seven of mollusks, and eight of crustaceans. Of interest is the difference in importance of the listed diseases in each of the four groups of aquatic animals. In mollusks, parasitic diseases dominate the list, while in fish and crustaceans virus diseases are dominant. Whether a listed disease is due to a virus, fungus, bacterium or a parasite, the occurrence of the disease may adversely affect international trade among trading partners that have, or do not have, the listed disease. By its very nature, the international trade in terrestrial animals and aquatic animals, and their products, is influenced by national and international politics. When the occurrence of an OIE listed or emerging disease becomes an issue between trading partners, trade restrictions may be put in place and disputes are often a consequence. The World Trade Organization named the OIE as the reference body for animal health as it relates to international trade. This action recognized the 88 year history of the work by the OIE in disease control, listing of diseases, the development of the terrestrial and aquatic codes and the diagnostic manuals, and the prompt notification of members by the OIE of the occurrence of listed diseases. The intent of the WTO with this action was likely to minimize disease related trade disputes brought before the WTO.