Key result
Targeted sentinel surveillance strategies based on network connectivity, spatial proximity, or network proximity detected 2 to 4.5 times more FMD outbreaks than random surveillance.
Why the study?
Uninformative surveillance strategies for endemic foot and mouth disease may waste resources, highlighting the need to evaluate sentinel surveillance allocation strategies with varying data requirements.
Observational
Effect estimate: 2-4.5 times more outbreaks
Targeted sentinel surveillance based on spatial proximity or network connectivity can efficiently detect foot and mouth disease outbreaks in endemic countries with limited resources.
Sentinel surveillance targeting high-connectivity or proximate farms detects 2–4× more outbreaks than random; leaves open optimal data requirements for endemic FMD control programs.
Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) affects cloven-hoofed animals globally and has become a major economic burden for many countries around the world. Countries that have had recent FMD outbreaks are prohibited from exporting most meat products; this has major economic consequences for farmers in those countries, particularly farmers that experience outbreaks or are near outbreaks. Reducing the number of FMD outbreaks in countries where the disease is endemic is an important challenge that could drastically improve the livelihoods of millions of people. As a result, significant effort is expended on surveillance; but there is a concern that uninformative surveillance strategies may waste resources that could be better used on control management. Rapid detection through sentinel surveillance may be a useful tool to reduce the scale and burden of outbreaks. In this study, we use an extensive outbreak and cattle shipment network dataset from the Republic of Türkiye to retrospectively test three possible strategies for sentinel surveillance allocation in countries with endemic FMD and minimal existing FMD surveillance infrastructure that differ in their data requirements: ranging from low to high data needs, we allocate limited surveillance to [1] farms that frequently send and receive shipments of animals (Network Connectivity), [2] farms near other farms with past outbreaks (Spatial Proximity) and [3] farms that receive many shipments from other farms with past outbreaks (Network Proximity). We determine that all of these surveillance methods find a similar number of outbreaks - 2-4.5 times more outbreaks than were detected by surveying farms at random. On average across surveillance efforts, the Network Proximity and Network Connectivity methods each find a similar number of outbreaks and the Spatial Proximity method always finds the fewest outbreaks. Since the Network Proximity method does not outperform the other methods, these results indicate that incorporating both cattle shipment data and outbreak data provides only marginal benefit over the less data-intensive surveillance allocation methods for this objective. We also find that these methods all find more outbreaks when outbreaks are rare. This is encouraging, as early detection is critical for outbreak management. Overall, since the Spatial Proximity and Network Connectivity methods find a similar proportion of outbreaks, and are less data-intensive than the Network Proximity method, countries with endemic FMD whose resources are constrained could prioritize allocating sentinels based on whichever of those two methods requires less additional data collection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Greiner et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD). Targeted sentinel surveillance allocation (Network Connectivity, Spatial Proximity, Network Proximity) vs. Random surveillance was evaluated on Number of outbreaks detected (2-4.5 times more outbreaks). Targeted sentinel surveillance strategies based on network connectivity, spatial proximity, or network proximity detected 2 to 4.5 times more FMD outbreaks than random surveillance.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: