Bovine Tuberculosis Risk Factors for British Herds Before and After the 2001 Foot-and-Mouth Epidemic: What have we Learned from the TB99 and CCS2005 Studies?

Over the last couple of decades, the UK experienced a substantial increase in the incidence and geographical spread of bovine tuberculosis (TB), in particular since the epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in 2001. The initiation of the Randomized Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) in 1998 in south-west England provided an opportunity for an in-depth collection of questionnaire data (covering farming practices, herd management and husbandry, trading and wildlife activity) from herds having experienced a TB breakdown between 1998 and early 2006 and randomly selected control herds, both within and outside the RBCT (the so-called TB99 and CCS2005 case-control studies). The data collated were split into four separate and comparable substudies related to either the pre-FMD or post-FMD period, which are brought together and discussed here for the first time. The findings suggest that the risk factors associated with TB breakdowns may have changed. Higher Mycobacterium bovis prevalence in badgers following the FMD epidemic may have contributed to the identification of the presence of badgers on a farm as a prominent TB risk factor only post-FMD. The strong emergence of contact/trading TB risk factors post-FMD suggests that the purchasing and movement of cattle, which took place to restock FMD-affected areas after 2001, may have exacerbated the TB problem. Post-FMD analyses also highlighted the potential impact of environmental factors on TB risk. Although no unique and universal solution exists to reduce the transmission of TB to and among British cattle, there is an evidence to suggest that applying the broad principles of biosecurity on farms reduces the risk of infection. However, with trading remaining as an important route of local and long-distance TB transmission, improvements in the detection of infected animals during pre- and post-movement testing should further reduce the geographical spread of the disease.

When one depends on the other: reporting of interaction in case-control and cohort studies

BACKGROUND: Interaction refers to the situation in which the effect of 1 exposure on an outcome differs across strata of another exposure. We did a survey of epidemiologic studies published in leading journals to examine how interaction is assessed and reported. METHODS: We selected 150 case-control and 75 cohort studies published between May 2001 and May 2007 in leading general medicine, epidemiology, and clinical specialist journals. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 225 studies, 138 (61%) addressed interaction. Among these, 25 (18%) presented no data or only a P value or a statement of statistical significance; 40 (29%) presented stratum-specific effect estimates but no meaningful comparison of these estimates; and 58 (42%) presented stratum-specific estimates and appropriate tests for interaction. Fifteen articles (11%) presented the individual effects of both exposures and also their joint effect or a product term, providing sufficient information to interpret interaction on an additive and multiplicative scale. Reporting was poorest in articles published in clinical specialist articles and most adequate in articles published in general medicine journals, with epidemiology journals in an intermediate position. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of articles reporting cohort and case-control studies address possible interactions between exposures. However, in about half of these, the information provided was unsatisfactory, and only 1 in 10 studies reported data that allowed readers to interpret interaction effects on an additive and multiplicative scale.

Three Experimental Approaches to Measure the Social Context Dependence of Prejudice Communication and Discriminatory Behavior

Empirical research on discrimination is faced with crucial problems stemming from the specific character of its object of study. In democratic societies the communication of prejudices and other forms of discriminatory behavior is considered socially undesirable and depends on situational factors such as whether a situation is considered private or whether a discriminatory consensus can be assumed. Regular surveys thus can only offer a blurred picture of the phenomenon. But also survey experiments intended to decrease the social desirability bias (SDB) so far failed in systematically implementing situational variables. This paper introduces three experimental approaches to improve the study of discrimination and other topics of social (un-)desirability. First, we argue in favor of cognitive context framing in surveys in order to operationalize the salience of situational norms. Second, factorial surveys offer a way to take situational contexts and substitute behavior into account. And third, choice experiments – a rather new method in sociology – offer a more valid method of measuring behavioral characteristics compared to simple items in surveys. All three approaches – which may be combined – are easy to implement in large-scale surveys. Results of empirical studies demonstrate the fruitfulness of each of these approaches.