↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Dynamic Human Behavioral Changes in Animal Disease Models: Challenges and Opportunities for Addressing Bias

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Modeling Dynamic Human Behavioral Changes in Animal Disease Models: Challenges and Opportunities for Addressing Bias
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2018.00137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arata Hidano, Gareth Enticott, Robert M. Christley, M. Carolyn Gates

Abstract

Over the past several decades, infectious disease modeling has become an essential tool for creating counterfactual scenarios that allow the effectiveness of different disease control policies to be evaluated prior to implementation in the real world. For livestock diseases, these models have become increasingly sophisticated as researchers have gained access to rich national livestock traceability databases, which enables inclusion of explicit spatial and temporal patterns in animal movements through network-based approaches. However, there are still many limitations in how we currently model animal disease dynamics. Critical among these is that many models make the assumption that human behaviors remain constant over time. As many studies have shown, livestock owners change their behaviors around trading, on-farm biosecurity, and disease management in response to complex factors such as increased awareness of disease risks, pressure to conform with social expectations, and the direct imposition of new national animal health regulations; all of which may significantly influence how a disease spreads within and between farms. Failing to account for these dynamics may produce a substantial layer of bias in infectious disease models, yet surprisingly little is currently known about the effects on model inferences. Here, we review the growing evidence on why these assumptions matter. We summarize the current knowledge about farmers' behavioral change in on-farm biosecurity and livestock trading practices and highlight the knowledge gaps that prohibit these behavioral changes from being incorporated into disease modeling frameworks. We suggest this knowledge gap can be filled only by more empirical longitudinal studies on farmers' behavioral change as well as theoretical modeling studies that can help to identify human behavioral changes that are important in disease transmission dynamics. Moreover, we contend it is time to shift our research approach: from modeling a single disease to modeling interactions between multiple diseases and from modeling a single farmer behavior to modeling interdependencies between multiple behaviors. In order to solve these challenges, there is a strong need for interdisciplinary collaboration across a wide range of fields including animal health, epidemiology, sociology, and animal welfare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Master 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 34 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 27 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 12%
Engineering 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 32 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 20 March 2020.
All research outputs
#3,559,938
of 26,427,317 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#722
of 8,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,703
of 344,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#21
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,427,317 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,505 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 344,740 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.