Imperial College London

DrIsobelBlake

Faculty of MedicineSchool of Public Health

Lecturer
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 3260isobel.blake

 
 
//

Location

 

G26Norfolk PlaceSt Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Pinsent:2014:10.1186/1471-2334-14-427,
author = {Pinsent, A and Blake, IM and White, MT and Riley, S},
doi = {10.1186/1471-2334-14-427},
journal = {BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES},
title = {Surveillance of low pathogenic novel H7N9 avian influenza in commercial poultry barns: detection of outbreaks and estimation of virus introduction time},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-427},
volume = {14},
year = {2014}
}

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB - BackgroundBoth high and low pathogenic subtype A avian influenza remain ongoing threats to the commercial poultry industry globally. The emergence of a novel low pathogenic H7N9 lineage in China presents itself as a new concern to both human and animal health and may necessitate additional surveillance in commercial poultry operations in affected regions.MethodsSampling data was simulated using a mechanistic model of H7N9 influenza transmission within commercial poultry barns together with a stochastic observation process. Parameters were estimated using maximum likelihood. We assessed the probability of detecting an outbreak at time of slaughter using both real-time polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR) and a hemagglutinin inhibition assay (HI assay) before considering more intense sampling prior to slaughter. The day of virus introduction and R 0 were estimated jointly from weekly flock sampling data. For scenarios where R 0 was known, we estimated the day of virus introduction into a barn under different sampling frequencies.ResultsIf birds were tested at time of slaughter, there was a higher probability of detecting evidence of an outbreak using an HI assay compared to rt-PCR, except when the virus was introduced <2 weeks before time of slaughter. Prior to the initial detection of infection N s a m p l e = 50 (1%) of birds were sampled on a weekly basis once, but after infection was detected, N s a m p l e = 2000 birds (40%) were sampled to estimate both parameters. We accurately estimated the day of virus introduction in isolation with weekly and 2-weekly sampling.ConclusionsA strong sampling effort would be required to infer both the day of virus introduction and R 0. Such a sampling effort would not be required to estimate the day of virus introduction alone once R 0 was known, and sampling N s a m p l e = 50 of birds in the flock on a weekly or 2 weekly basis would be sufficient.
AU - Pinsent,A
AU - Blake,IM
AU - White,MT
AU - Riley,S
DO - 10.1186/1471-2334-14-427
PY - 2014///
SN - 1471-2334
TI - Surveillance of low pathogenic novel H7N9 avian influenza in commercial poultry barns: detection of outbreaks and estimation of virus introduction time
T2 - BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-427
UR - http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000340058800001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/61643
VL - 14
ER -