English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background This review aimed to provide constructive suggestions for the control and management of avian influenza through quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the impact of different live poultry market (LPM) interventions. Methods Both English and Chinese language databases were searched for articles that were published on or before 9 November 2018. After extraction and assessment of the included literature, Stata14.0 was applied to perform a meta-analysis to explore the impacts of LPM interventions. Results A total of 19 studies were identified. In total, 224 human, 3550 poultry, and 13 773 environment samples were collected before the intervention; 181 people, 4519 poultry, and 9562 environments were sampled after LPM interventions. Avian influenza virus (AIV) detection rates in the LPM environment (odds ratio [OR], 0.393; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.262–0.589) and the incidence of AIV infection (OR, 0.045; 95% CI, 0.025–0.079) were significantly lower after LPM interventions, while interventions were not significantly effective in reducing AIV detection in poultry samples (OR, 0.803; 95% CI, 0.403–1.597). Conclusions LPM interventions can reduce AIV human infections and the detection rate of AIV in market environments.

Interventions in Live Poultry Markets for the Control of Avian Influenza: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis