CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 278Zoonotic diseases and public healthSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reverse Zoonotic Disease Transmission (Zooanthroponosis): A Systematic Review of Seldom-Documented Human Biological Threats to Animals

Open access
Messenger, Ali M., Barnes, Amber N., Gray, Gregory C.·2014·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0089055PMC PMC3938448
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research regarding zoonotic diseases often focuses on infectious diseases animals have given to humans. However, an increasing number of reports indicate that humans are transmitting pathogens to animals. Recent examples include methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, and Ascaris lumbricoides. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of published literature regarding reverse zoonoses and highlight the need for future work in this area. METHODS: An initial broad literature review yielded 4763 titles, of which 4704 were excluded as not meeting inclusion criteria. After careful screening, 56 articles (from 56 countries over three decades) with documented human-to-animal disease transmission were included in this report. FINDINGS: In these publications, 21 (38%) pathogens studied were bacterial, 16 (29%) were viral, 12 (21%) were parasitic, and 7 (13%) were fungal, other, or involved multiple pathogens. Effected animals included wildlife (n = 28, 50%), livestock (n = 24, 43%), companion animals (n = 13, 23%), and various other animals or animals not explicitly mentioned (n = 2, 4%). Published reports of reverse zoonoses transmission occurred in every continent except Antarctica therefore indicating a worldwide disease threat. INTERPRETATION: As we see a global increase in industrial animal production, the rapid movement of humans and animals, and the habitats of humans and wild animals intertwining with great complexity, the future promises more opportunities for humans to cause reverse zoonoses. Scientific research must be conducted in this area to provide a richer understanding of emerging and reemerging disease threats. As a result, multidisciplinary approaches such as One Health will be needed to mitigate these problems.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0089055

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Flowchart demonstrating the identification and selection process for publications included in this review.
Figure 1 Flowchart demonstrating the identification and selection process for publications included in this review.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Timeline and frequency of reverse zoonoses publications included in this review shown by pathogen type.
Figure 2 Timeline and frequency of reverse zoonoses publications included in this review shown by pathogen type.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports included in review as illustrated by study location. Note: Many reports identified several countries therefore each country in this figure does not necessarily represent a single corresponding publication.
Figure 3 Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports included in review as illustrated by study location. Note: Many reports identified several countries therefore each country in this figure does not necessarily represent a single corresponding publication.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Study locations for literature included in review. A. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports as illustrated by study location and pathogen type; B. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on bacterial pathogens as illustrated by study location; C. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on viral pathogens as illustrated by study location; D. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on parasitic pathogens as illustrated by study location; E. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on fungal pathogens as illustrated by study location.
Figure 4 Study locations for literature included in review. A. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports as illustrated by study location and pathogen type; B. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on bacterial pathogens as illustrated by study location; C. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on viral pathogens as illustrated by study location; D. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on parasitic pathogens as illustrated by study location; E. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on fungal pathogens as illustrated by study location.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Animal type and study location included in review literature. A. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports as illustrated by study location and animal(s) infected; B. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on companion animals as illustrated by study location; C. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on livestock as illustrated by study location; D. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on wildlife as illustrated by study location.
Figure 5 Animal type and study location included in review literature. A. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports as illustrated by study location and animal(s) infected; B. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on companion animals as illustrated by study location; C. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on livestock as illustrated by study location; D. Proportion of reverse zoonoses scientific reports on wildlife as illustrated by study location.CC BY · PubMed Central

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?

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

Show all 67 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. OJ Adejinmi, 2008, Preliminary investigation of zooanthroponosis in a Nigerian Zoological Garden, Vet Res (Pakistan), 2, 38
  2. M Pal, 1997, Zooanthroponotic significance of Trichophyton rubrum in a rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Verh. ber. Erkrg, Zootiere, 38, 355

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 278

Related

Metadata

Authors
Messenger, A. M., Barnes, A. N., & Gray, G. C.
Affiliations
University of Florida Health (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Gregory C.
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2014-02-28
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
e89055
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0089055
PMC
PMC3938448
OpenAlex
W2078639388
Cited by
278
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 3
FWCI
2.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Funders
  • University of Florida
  • National Institutes of Health (7r01ai068803-05)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01-AI068803)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Zoonotic diseases and public health
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Keywords
zoonotic pathogens, wildlife, livestock, companion animals, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, influenza A virus, Cryptosporidium parvum, Ascaris lumbricoides, emerging and re-emerging diseases, One Health
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Domestic, Animals, Wild, Communicable Diseases, Humans, Influenza A virus, Zoonoses, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

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