Cited by 79Zoonotic diseases and public healthRespiratory viral infections researchAnimal Virus Infections Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Are adenoviruses zoonotic? A systematic review of the evidence

Open access

Abstract

Adenoviruses (AdVs) are major contributors to clinical illnesses. Novel human and animal AdVs continue to be identified and characterized. Comparative analyses using bioinformatic methods and Omics-based technologies allow insights into how these human pathogens have emerged and their potential for host cross-species transmission. Systematic review of literature published across ProQuest, Pubmed, and Web of Science databases for evidence of adenoviral zoonotic potential identified 589 citations. After removing duplicates, 327 citations were screened for relevance; of which, 74 articles received full-text reviews. Among these, 24 were included here, of which 16 demonstrated evidence of zoonotic transmission of AdVs. These documented instances of AdV crossing host species barriers between humans and non-human primate, bat, feline, swine, canine, ovine, and caprine. Eight studies sought to but did not find evidence of zoonosis. The findings demonstrate substantial evidence suggesting AdVs have previously and will continue crossing host species barriers. These have human health consequences both in terms of novel pathogen emergence and epidemic outbreaks, and of appropriate and safe use of non-human adenoviruses for therapeutics. As routine human clinical diagnostics may miss a novel cross-species adenovirus infection in humans, next generation sequencing or panspecies molecular diagnostics may be necessary to detect such incursions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/22221751.2019.1690953

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • No suitable tool for assessing risk of bias in noncomparative studies could be found in the literature.

    “No suitable tool for assessing noncomparative studies could be found in the literature and similar systematic reviews of human-to-human or animal-to-human transmission of infectious agents that we could find did not undertake a RoB assessment [21–24].”

    From Evidence for Human-to-Human Transmission of Hantavirus: A Systematic Review (2022) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Methods section describes a literature search and study screening, but does not discuss whether a suitable risk-of-bias tool for noncomparative studies exists. Searches for risk-of-bias tools and quality assessment found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.3201/1708.101760 · DOI
  2. 10.1128/mcb.7.2.875-886.1987 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Borkenhagen, L. K., Fieldhouse, J. K., Seto, D., & Gray, G. C.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Gregory C.
Venue
Emerging Microbes & Infections
Published
2019-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
1679-1687
ISSN
2222-1751 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2990203560
Cited by
79
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Emerging Microbes & Infections (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Zoonotic diseases and public health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Respiratory viral infections research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
Keywords
adenovirus, zoonotic transmission, interspecies transmission, non-human primates, bats, canine adenovirus, emerging pathogens, molecular diagnosis
MeSH terms
Adenoviridae, Adenoviridae Infections, Animals, Cats, Dogs, Goats, Humans, Phylogeny, Sheep, Swine, Zoonoses, Host Specificity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review