PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Gerardo Martín
AU  - Joseph Erinjery
AU  - Dileepa Ediriweera
AU  - H. Janaka de Silva
AU  - David G. Lalloo
AU  - Takuya Iwamura
AU  - Kris A. Murray
TI  - Redefining snakebite envenoming as a zoonosis: disease incidence is driven by snake ecology, socioeconomics and anthropogenic impacts
AID  - 10.1101/2021.10.01.21264438
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.10.01.21264438
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/04/2021.10.01.21264438.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/04/2021.10.01.21264438.full
AB  - Snakebite is the only WHO-listed, not infectious neglected tropical disease (NTD), although its eco-epidemiology is similar to that of zoonotic infections: envenoming occurs after a vertebrate host contacts a human. Accordingly, snakebite risk represents the interaction between snake and human factors, but their quantification has been limited by data availability. Models of infectious disease transmission are instrumental for the mitigation of NTDs and zoonoses. Here, we represented snake-human interactions with disease transmission models to approximate geospatial estimates of snakebite incidence in Sri Lanka, a global hotspot. Snakebites and envenomings are described by the product of snake and human abundance, mirroring directly transmitted zoonoses. We found that human-snake contact rates vary according to land cover (surrogate of occupation and socioeconomic status), the impacts of humans and climate on snake abundance, and by snake species. Our findings show that redefining snakebite as zoonosis provides a mechanistic eco-epidemiological basis to understand snakebites, and the possible implications of global environmental and demographic change for the burden of snakebite.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded by the Medical Research Council grant number MP/P024513/1, obtained by KM, TI, DGL, HJdeS, and PJD.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This is a proof of concept study that analyses published data, and did not require an ethics assessment.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData and code are fully available and accessible in the public and archived repository. https://zenodo.org/badge/latestdoi/392745886