The value of livestock abortion surveillance in Tanzania: identifying disease priorities and informing interventions

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

The paper examined livestock abortion, as it is an important disease syndrome that affects productivity and livestock economies. If livestock abortion remains unexamined it poses risks to public health.

Several pathogens are associated with livestock abortions across Africa however the livestock disease surveillance data rarely include information from abortion events, little is known about the aetiology and impacts of livestock abortions, and data are not available to inform prioritisation of disease interventions. Therefore the current study seeks to examine the issue in detail and proposes some solutions.

The study took place in 15 wards in northern Tanzania spanning pastoral, agropastoral, and smallholder agro-ecological systems. The key objective is to investigate the causes and impacts of livestock abortion.

The data collection system was set up such that farmers reported abortion cases to the field officers of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries livestock.

The reports were made to the investigation teams. The team only included abortion of those that the livestock field officers could attend to within 72 hours of the event occurring.

Also, a field investigation was carried out to collect diagnostic samples from aborted materials. In addition, aborting dams and questionnaires were administered to collect data on herd/flock management. Laboratory diagnostic tests were carried out for a range of abortigenic pathogens

Over the period of the study, 215 abortion events in cattle (n=71), sheep 48 (n=44), and goats (n=100) were investigated. All 49 investigated cases varied widely across wards. The aetiological attribution, achieved for 19.5% of cases through PCR-based diagnostics, was significantly affected by delays in the field investigation.

The result also revealed that vaginal swabs from aborting dams provided a practical and sensitive source of diagnostic material for pathogen detection.

Livestock abortion surveillance can generate valuable information on causes of zoonotic disease outbreaks, and livestock reproductive losses and can identify important pathogens that are not easily captured through other forms of livestock disease surveillance. The study demonstrated the feasibility of establishing an effective reporting and investigation system that could be implemented across a range of settings, including remote rural areas,

Strengths:

The paper combines both science and socio-economic methodology to achieve the aim of the study. The methodology was well presented and the sequence was great. The authors explain where and how the data was collected. Figure 2 was used to describe the study area which was excellently done. The section on the investigation of cases was well written. The sample analysis was also well-written. The authors devoted a section to summarizing the investigated cases and description of the livestock 221-study population. The logit model was well-presented.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The paper "The Value of Livestock Abortion Surveillance in Tanzania: Identifying Disease Priorities and Informing Interventions" provides a comprehensive analysis of the importance of livestock abortion surveillance in Tanzania. The authors aim to highlight the significance of this surveillance system in identifying disease priorities and guiding interventions to mitigate the impact of livestock abortions on both animal and human health.

Summary:

The paper begins by discussing the context of livestock farming in Tanzania and the significant economic and social impact of livestock abortions. The authors then present a detailed overview of the livestock abortion surveillance system in Tanzania, including its objectives, methods, and data collection process. They analyze the data collected from this surveillance system over a specific period to identify the major causes of livestock abortions and assess their public health implications.

Evaluation:

Overall, this paper provides valuable insights into the importance of livestock abortion surveillance as a tool for disease prioritization and intervention planning in Tanzania. The authors effectively demonstrate the utility of this surveillance system in identifying emerging diseases, monitoring disease trends, and informing evidence-based interventions to control and prevent livestock abortions.

Strengths:

(1) Clear Objective: The paper clearly articulates its objective of highlighting the value of livestock abortion surveillance in Tanzania.

(2) Comprehensive Analysis: The authors provide a thorough analysis of the surveillance system, including its methodology, data collection process, and findings as seen in the supplementary files.

(3) Practical Implications: The paper discusses the practical implications of the surveillance system for disease control and public health interventions in Tanzania.

(4) Well-Structured: The paper is well-organized, with clear sections and subheadings that facilitate understanding and navigation.

Suggestions for Improvement:

(1) Data Presentation: While the analysis is comprehensive, the presentation of data could be enhanced with the use of more visual aids such as tables, graphs, or charts to illustrate key findings.

(2) Discussion Section: The paper could benefit from a more in-depth discussion of the implications of the findings for disease control strategies and policy formulation in Tanzania.

(3) Future Directions: Including recommendations for future research or areas for further investigation would add depth to the paper.

Summary:

This paper contains thorough analysis and valuable insights. Overall, it makes a significant contribution to the literature on livestock abortion surveillance and its implications for disease control in Tanzania.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The authors delved into an important aspect of abortifacient diseases of livestock in Tanzania. The thoughts of the authors on the topic and its significance are implied, and the methodological approach needs further clarity. The number of wards in the study area, statistical selection of wards, type of questionnaire ie open or close-ended. Statistical analyses of outcomes were not clearly elucidated in the manuscript. Fifteen wards were mentioned in the text but 13 used what were the exclusion criteria. Observations were from pastoral, agropastoral, and smallholder agroecological farmers. No sample numbers or questionnaires were attributed to the above farming systems to correlate findings with management systems. The impacts of the research investigation output are not clearly visible as to warrant intervention methods. What were the identified pathogens from laboratory investigation, particularly with the use of culture and PCR not even mentioning the zoonotic pathogens encountered if any? The public health importance of any of the abortifacient agents was not highlighted.

In conclusion, based on the intent of the authors and the content of this research, and the weight of the research topic, there are obvious weaknesses in the critical data analysis to demonstrate cause, effect, and impact.