Volume 18, Number 4—April 2012
Peer Reviewed Report Available Online Only
Multidisciplinary and Evidence-based Method for Prioritizing Diseases of Food-producing Animals and Zoonoses
Marie-France Humblet1, Sébastien Vandeputte1, Adelin Albert, Christiane Gosset, Nathalie Kirschvink, Eric Haubruge, Fabienne Fecher-Bourgeois, Paul-Pierre Pastoret, and Claude Saegerman
Table 1
Fifty-seven criteria used for prioritization method for diseases of food-producing animals and zoonoses and corresponding weight attribution by experts, Europe
| Category, criteria | Minimum | Average | Maximum | Fitting distribution* |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epidemiology | ||||
| Illness rate, % | 2.05 | 7.59 | 18.00 | Pert (2,05; 5; 18) |
| Case-fatality rate, % | 4.19 | 9.13 | 18.00 | Pert (4,19; 5; 18) |
| Specificity of pathogen | 0.00 | 4.55 | 10.23 | Uniform (0; 10,23) |
| Mode of transmission | 0.00 | 8.08 | 23.52 | Pert (0; 10; 23,52) |
| Incubation period | 0.00 | 3.43 | 6.00 | Pert (0; 2; 6) |
| Clinical course | 0.00 | 2.93 | 6.00 | Pert (0; 2; 6) |
| Persistence in environment | 0.00 | 6.37 | 12.56 | Pert (0; 5; 12,56) |
| Epizootic potential | 0.00 | 9.92 | 22.50 | Pert (0; 10; 22,5) |
| Evolutive characteristics of pathogen | 1.89 | 6.39 | 18.00 | Pert (0; 5; 18) |
| Clinical disease in cattle | 0.00 | 4.52 | 10.71 | Triang (0; 0; 10,71) |
| Clinical disease in small ruminants | 0.00 | 2.37 | 4.74 | Triang (0; 0; 4,74) |
| Clinical disease in swine | 0.00 | 3.60 | 9.00 | Triang (0; 0; 9) |
| Clinical disease in equines | 0.00 | 2.99 | 10.00 | Pert (0; 2; 10) |
| Clinical disease in poultry | 0.00 | 3.42 | 9.00 | Triang (0; 0; 9) |
| Clinical disease in lagomorphs | 0.00 | 3.42 | 9.00 | Triang (0; 0; 9) |
| Clinical disease in wildlife | 0.00 | 4.39 | 11.25 | Pert (0; 2; 11;25) |
| Presence/absence of vector(s)/reservoir(s) in European Union | 3.07 | 6.90 | 11.25 | Pert (3,07; 5; 11,25) |
| Intercategory weight | 10.00 | 19.67 | 25.00 | Pert (10; 20; 25) |
| Prevention/control | ||||
| Control of reservoir(s) or vector(s) | 0.00 | 6.13 | 10.00 | Uniform (0; 10) |
| Vaccination | 5.00 | 8.63 | 15.00 | Uniform (5; 15) |
| Treatment | 3.00 | 6.63 | 10.00 | Uniform (3; 10) |
| Availability and quality of diagnostic tools | 5.00 | 7.69 | 10.00 | Uniform (5; 10) |
| Knowledge of pathogenic agent | 0.00 | 7.38 | 15.00 | Pert (0; 5; 15) |
| Effectiveness of control measures other than treatment, vaccination, and control of vectors | 1.00 | 7.26 | 10.00 | Uniform (1; 10) |
| Effectiveness of prevention measures other than vaccination | 5.00 | 8.72 | 12.00 | Pert (5; 10; 12) |
| Surveillance of pathogenic agent in European Union or worldwide | 4.00 | 7.57 | 15.00 | Triang (4; 4; 15) |
| Intercategory weight | 10.00 | 18.83 | 25.00 | Pert (10; 20; 25) |
| Economy/trade | ||||
| Losses of productivity (milk, eggs, growth) | 0.00 | 6.35 | 17.14 | Pert (0; 9; 17,14) |
| Additional costs: mandatory slaughtering | 0.00 | 5.11 | 12.95 | Uniform (0; 12,95) |
| Additional costs: treatment, disinfection, labor | 0.00 | 4.40 | 8.57 | Pert (0; 5; 8,57) |
| Limited importation–exportation | 0.00 | 4.40 | 8.57 | Pert (0; 5; 8,57) |
| Disturbance of supply and demand (decrease in prices) | 0.00 | 5.54 | 9.23 | Uniform (0; 9,23) |
| Impact on adjacent sectors (tourism) | 0.00 | 4.80 | 17.14 | Triang (0; 0; 17,14) |
| Impact on cattle industry | 0.00 | 3.29 | 17.14 | Triang (0; 0; 17,14) |
| Impact on small ruminants industry | 0.00 | 3.09 | 8.57 | Uniform (0; 8,57) |
| Impact on swine industry | 0.00 | 1.87 | 8.57 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Impact on equine industry | 0.00 | 2.81 | 8.57 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Impact on poultry industry | 0.00 | 1.77 | 8.57 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Impact on rabbit industry | 0.00 | 2.81 | 8.57 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Impact on wildlife industry | 0.00 | 2.81 | 8.57 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Zoonotic impact (cost of illness) | 0.00 | 2.17 | 8.96 | Triang (0; 0; 8,57) |
| Zoonotic impact (costs of prevention per person) | 0.00 | 4.59 | 10.75 | Triang (0; 0; 10,75) |
| Intercategory weight | 10.00 | 23.00 | 30.00 | Uniform (10; 30) |
| Public health | ||||
| Zoonotic/common agent | 0.00 | 7.81 | 20.00 | Pert (0; 10; 20) |
| Classification of zoonoses | 0.00 | 5.51 | 11.25 | Pert (0; 6; 11,25) |
| Disease knowledge in humans | 2.40 | 7.27 | 11.25 | Pert (2,4; 5; 11,25) |
| Illness rate, % | 1.01 | 8.08 | 12.00 | Uniform (1,01; 12) |
| Case-fatality rate, % | 1.01 | 9.46 | 18.00 | Pert (1,01; 10; 18) |
| Mode of transmission | 0.00 | 5.71 | 10.59 | Pert (0; 5; 10,59) |
| After effects or negative impact on the patient quality of life | 5.29 | 8.88 | 12.00 | Uniform (5,29; 12) |
| Presence of a control plan | 3.03 | 5.37 | 6.99 | Pert (3,03; 5; 6,99) |
| Epidemic potential | 5.29 | 8.98 | 12.13 | Uniform (5,29; 12,13) |
| Vaccination | 5.00 | 7.49 | 11.25 | Uniform (5; 11,25) |
| Treatment | 5.00 | 7.35 | 11.25 | Uniform (5; 11,25) |
| Availability and quality of diagnostic tools | 5.00 | 8.10 | 15.17 | Triang (5; 5; 15,17) |
| Intercategory weight | 20.00 | 24.67 | 30.00 | Uniform (20; 30) |
| Society | ||||
| Lower human consumption of animals | 0.00 | 7.19 | 15.00 | Uniform (0; 15) |
| Perception of problem by consumer | 0.00 | 6.92 | 12.00 | Uniform (0; 12) |
| Potential impact on media | 0.00 | 6.50 | 20.00 | Uniform (0; 20) |
| Impact on animal welfare and biodiversity | 1.00 | 9.38 | 20.00 | Uniform (0; 20) |
| Intercategory weight | 8.00 | 13.83 | 20.00 | Uniform (8; 20) |
*Pert, program evaluation and review technique; uniform, uniform probability distribution; triang, triangular distribution (www.palisade.com/downloads/manuals/EN/RISK5_EN.pdf).
1These authors contributed equally to this article.
Page created: February 17, 2012
Page updated: February 17, 2012
Page reviewed: February 17, 2012
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.