对圈养野生动物物种的发病率和死亡率回顾性研究的系统回顾。

IF 0.7 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Kyle McCreesh, Amanda L Guthrie, Simon Spiro, Stuart Patterson
{"title":"对圈养野生动物物种的发病率和死亡率回顾性研究的系统回顾。","authors":"Kyle McCreesh, Amanda L Guthrie, Simon Spiro, Stuart Patterson","doi":"10.1638/2023-0093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Zoological institutions manage animals for conservation, education, entertainment, and research purposes. Zoological staff have a responsibility to safeguard the welfare of animals in their care. Retrospective morbidity and/or mortality studies (MMSs) can be useful tools to highlight common diseases in captive wildlife populations. There is currently no standardized methodology for conducting MMSs. Variation in the methodology of MMSs, particularly the categorization of diseases, can make comparisons between studies challenging and may limit the applicability of the results. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) compliant systematic review was performed, which identified 67 MMSs describing 146 species of captive wildlife. These MMSs are becoming more common and were predominantly performed on mammals (76/146). Prospective authors are encouraged to perform MMSs on amphibians, birds, reptiles, fish, and invertebrates. The studied animals were mostly managed at institutions in the United States of America (28/67, 41.2%) and Europe (14/67, 20.9%). Classifying individuals into age groups facilitates the identification of disease trends within age classes. Only 22/67 (32.8%) studies cited justification for their age classification; classifications should be based on a referenced source on the breeding biology of the studied species. There is variation in the body systems used by authors and into which system a disease is categorized, which makes study comparisons challenging. Diseases were predominantly categorized by etiology and body system (28/77, 36.4%). Because of its ubiquity, the use of the categorization system employed by the pathology module of the Zoological Information Management System is recommended as a useful standard. This system is imperfect, and amendments to it are suggested. The results and recommendations of this study were discussed with a panel of zoo and wildlife experts; guidelines have been formulated for prospective authors aiming to conduct MMSs in captive wildlife.</p>","PeriodicalId":17667,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RETROSPECTIVE MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY STUDIES ON CAPTIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES.\",\"authors\":\"Kyle McCreesh, Amanda L Guthrie, Simon Spiro, Stuart Patterson\",\"doi\":\"10.1638/2023-0093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Zoological institutions manage animals for conservation, education, entertainment, and research purposes. Zoological staff have a responsibility to safeguard the welfare of animals in their care. Retrospective morbidity and/or mortality studies (MMSs) can be useful tools to highlight common diseases in captive wildlife populations. There is currently no standardized methodology for conducting MMSs. Variation in the methodology of MMSs, particularly the categorization of diseases, can make comparisons between studies challenging and may limit the applicability of the results. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) compliant systematic review was performed, which identified 67 MMSs describing 146 species of captive wildlife. These MMSs are becoming more common and were predominantly performed on mammals (76/146). Prospective authors are encouraged to perform MMSs on amphibians, birds, reptiles, fish, and invertebrates. The studied animals were mostly managed at institutions in the United States of America (28/67, 41.2%) and Europe (14/67, 20.9%). Classifying individuals into age groups facilitates the identification of disease trends within age classes. Only 22/67 (32.8%) studies cited justification for their age classification; classifications should be based on a referenced source on the breeding biology of the studied species. There is variation in the body systems used by authors and into which system a disease is categorized, which makes study comparisons challenging. Diseases were predominantly categorized by etiology and body system (28/77, 36.4%). Because of its ubiquity, the use of the categorization system employed by the pathology module of the Zoological Information Management System is recommended as a useful standard. This system is imperfect, and amendments to it are suggested. The results and recommendations of this study were discussed with a panel of zoo and wildlife experts; guidelines have been formulated for prospective authors aiming to conduct MMSs in captive wildlife.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1638/2023-0093\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1638/2023-0093","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

动物学机构管理动物的目的是为了保护、教育、娱乐和研究。动物园的工作人员有责任保护他们所管理的动物的福利。回顾性发病率和/或死亡率研究(MMS)可作为突出圈养野生动物种群常见疾病的有用工具。目前还没有标准化的方法来开展 MMS。MMS 研究方法的差异,尤其是疾病分类的差异,会使研究之间的比较具有挑战性,并可能限制研究结果的适用性。我们进行了一项符合系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)的系统综述,确定了 67 项 MMS,描述了 146 种圈养野生动物。这些 MMS 越来越常见,主要针对哺乳动物(76/146)。我们鼓励未来的作者对两栖动物、鸟类、爬行动物、鱼类和无脊椎动物进行MMS。所研究的动物大多由美国(28/67,41.2%)和欧洲(14/67,20.9%)的机构管理。将动物划分为不同的年龄组有助于确定不同年龄组内的疾病趋势。只有 22/67 项(32.8%)研究引用了年龄分类的理由;分类应基于所研究物种繁殖生物学的参考资料。作者使用的身体系统和疾病被归入的系统存在差异,这使得研究比较具有挑战性。疾病主要按病因和身体系统分类(28/77,36.4%)。动物学信息管理系统(Zoological Information Management System)病理学模块所采用的分类系统因其普遍性而被推荐为有用的标准。该系统尚不完善,建议对其进行修正。本研究的结果和建议已与动物园和野生动物专家小组进行了讨论,并为今后打算对圈养野生动物进行MMS研究的作者制定了指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RETROSPECTIVE MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY STUDIES ON CAPTIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES.

Zoological institutions manage animals for conservation, education, entertainment, and research purposes. Zoological staff have a responsibility to safeguard the welfare of animals in their care. Retrospective morbidity and/or mortality studies (MMSs) can be useful tools to highlight common diseases in captive wildlife populations. There is currently no standardized methodology for conducting MMSs. Variation in the methodology of MMSs, particularly the categorization of diseases, can make comparisons between studies challenging and may limit the applicability of the results. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) compliant systematic review was performed, which identified 67 MMSs describing 146 species of captive wildlife. These MMSs are becoming more common and were predominantly performed on mammals (76/146). Prospective authors are encouraged to perform MMSs on amphibians, birds, reptiles, fish, and invertebrates. The studied animals were mostly managed at institutions in the United States of America (28/67, 41.2%) and Europe (14/67, 20.9%). Classifying individuals into age groups facilitates the identification of disease trends within age classes. Only 22/67 (32.8%) studies cited justification for their age classification; classifications should be based on a referenced source on the breeding biology of the studied species. There is variation in the body systems used by authors and into which system a disease is categorized, which makes study comparisons challenging. Diseases were predominantly categorized by etiology and body system (28/77, 36.4%). Because of its ubiquity, the use of the categorization system employed by the pathology module of the Zoological Information Management System is recommended as a useful standard. This system is imperfect, and amendments to it are suggested. The results and recommendations of this study were discussed with a panel of zoo and wildlife experts; guidelines have been formulated for prospective authors aiming to conduct MMSs in captive wildlife.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine
Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
74
审稿时长
9-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine (JZWM) is considered one of the major sources of information on the biology and veterinary aspects in the field. It stems from the founding premise of AAZV to share zoo animal medicine experiences. The Journal evolved from the long history of members producing case reports and the increased publication of free-ranging wildlife papers. The Journal accepts manuscripts of original research findings, case reports in the field of veterinary medicine dealing with captive and free-ranging wild animals, brief communications regarding clinical or research observations that may warrant publication. It also publishes and encourages submission of relevant editorials, reviews, special reports, clinical challenges, abstracts of selected articles and book reviews. The Journal is published quarterly, is peer reviewed, is indexed by the major abstracting services, and is international in scope and distribution. Areas of interest include clinical medicine, surgery, anatomy, radiology, physiology, reproduction, nutrition, parasitology, microbiology, immunology, pathology (including infectious diseases and clinical pathology), toxicology, pharmacology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信