Zoonotic Diseases: Real Science Review

A McDonalds cook’s product could be a McMuffin. A carpenter’s product may be a house. What might the product of a scientist be? It is a scientific paper published in a scholarly journal. When scientists complete a research project that explain the project and report the results in a report that they submit for publication in a scholarly journal. Upon receipt of the scientific paper, the journal editor sends the paper to experts for evaluation, a process called “peer review.” Peer review involves a detailed analysis by those experts of the strengths and weaknesses of the research addressed in the paper. Peer reviewers may approve the paper as written, may reject the paper as written but offer to review a revision, or completely reject it. If reviewers and editor approve the paper for publication after peer review, this published paper (also called a journal article) adds to the accumulating data and concepts in that area of research.

Articles like this are considered “primary sources” of research and are made available to scientists all around the world. All other sources of scientific information like reviews, textbooks, web sites, and lectures are called “secondary or tertiary sources” and lack the rigorous evaluation by experts that is given to original research papers.

You are now going to learn about “peer review” by doing it, using an actual original research report (scientific paper).

“What? I’m not a Ph.D.!
How do you expect me to do something so sophisticated?”

Slow down! No need to panic! It is not really all that sophisticated. You have the same kind of brain as a scientist! You are able to think critically and creatively.
You are able to determine good ideas from bad ideas and strong data from weak data. You can tell the difference between important findings and trivial findings. And you are capable of generating your own ideas. While you don’t yet have the formal training to be as good at this as real scientists, we all must start somewhere!

We are going to help you get started by giving you all the tools you need to conduct your own peer review of a scientific paper. First, we will give you key background information to help you understand more about both the peer review process and the specific research topic you will be considering. Finally, we will provide you with a version of the original research paper that we re-wrote so it is easier to understand. At the key points in the paper, we show a text box with questions you need to answer with critical and creative thought.

Through this activity, you will discover the thrill of realizing you too can think critically and conduct real scientific analysis when provided the tools, shown how and given the chance to practice! If your teacher allows several students to work together on this research review, you will also learn from each other how to think critically and creatively. Best of all, you will be learning science in the very same way as real scientists. That is what this experience is all about!

This learning activity aims to give you first-hand experience with the peer review process. We do not expect that you are experts in the field, but we are confident that you and your classmates will be able to successfully analyze the research report provided. You may need to ask an adult for assistance or look up a few things on your own, but that is perfectly okay.

In this activity, you will conduct the research review and then write a report that we will pretend will be sent to the journal editor. (In this case, others in your class and your teacher will be our imaginary journal editor.) Depending on instructions given by your teacher, you will either work independently or as part of a group to analyze each section of the research paper using the questions in the text boxes below as your guide. This activity is not meant to be performed all in one class period. Best results can occur if you can pool ideas from a well-working learning group.

It is important for you to know that you are not obliged to praise the article. Your job is to analyze it and if needed, even criticize parts of the rationale, experimental methods, results, or research discussion that seem deficient.

We expect you to think critically and creatively and share those ideas with others in your report.

A proper research report has four main parts, in this order: why, how, what and so what. Most research reports begin with an “Abstract” that summarizes the four main parts of the report.

Why. An introduction section (often called “Introduction”) of the report explains why the researchers wanted to invest time, money, and effort into this study. If the study is observational, the authors should explain why the scientific world would benefit from knowing about these observations. If the study is driven by a hypothesis, that hypothesis should be stated clearly along with an explanation justifying it.

How. The next section of the report (often called “Methods”) describes the experimental design, tools and equipment used, and details of the procedures used in the study.

What. The third section of the report (often called “Results”) presents the data generated by the study. Data are usually accompanied by statistical analysis. This analysis helps the reader know if the research results are likely due to chance or experimental manipulation.

So What. The last section of the report (often called “Discussion”) includes a discussion of the meaning of the research results. This includes analysis of the limitations of the research methods used, interpretation of the data, and discussion of the research relative to what other researchers have reported about the topic. This section also explores how the results from this study apply to the original need for the information or hypothesis. Finally, the authors usually suggest how their results might lead to new research projects to further extend the knowledge and understanding of the topic.

You will be addressing each of these four parts in your review.

Zoonotic diseases are caused by infections with parasites, bacteria, viruses, fungi, or prions that can be transmitted between animals and humans. Infected animals or humans may serve as carriers of the organism and spread it to others without being sick themselves.

Zoonotic diseases are thought to account for more than 60% of infectious diseases and 75% of emerging infectious diseases in humans. The word “zoo” in zoonotic reminds us that the key distinction from other kinds of diseases is the role played by animals in spread of the disease to humans.

Most infectious diseases have a certain degree of species specificity. That is, the disease agent may affect only a few animal species and/or humans.

A key feature of zoonotic diseases is that certain animals serve as a reservoir of disease that can spread to humans. Thus, a key requirement for finding a suitable research paper for simulated peer review is to find a research report that demonstrates that a given disease is actually zoonotic. Often, the early stage of such research comes from detective work, in which circumstances suggest that the disease is zoonotic. For example, if one is bitten by a dog and the person and the dog later become sick with rabies, that strong association suggests that rabies is a zoonotic disease.

But association or correlation are not proof. What kind of evidence serves as proof that a disease is caused by a pathogen transmitted between animals and humans? First, one needs to show that a given suspect organism is necessary for the disease to appear, keeping in mind that a minimal set of conditions and events must occur that are sufficient for the pathogen to be transmitted between animals and humans.

There is no single accepted method to establish a causal relationship between an infective agent and its corresponding infectious disease. Key criteria for establishing that a suspect organism is both a necessary and sufficient cause of a zoonotic disease include:

• A specific exposure to an infected animal creates a specific disease effect in the exposed human.
• The exposure has to occur in time before the effect (for example, disease occurrence).
• Disease rates should decrease after the causal agent has been eliminated or blocked, as by preventing future exposure or vaccination.

The belief that COVID-19 is zoonotic remains uncertain, but genetic sequence data reveals that the closest known viral relative is a coronavirus circulating in horseshoe bats. Experiments show that several animal species are susceptible to COVID-19 infection. Other animals have also been shown to become infected in natural settings when in contact with infected humans. Some infected animals can also transmit the virus to other animals in natural settings. Once a few humans became infected, an explosive human-to-human spread of the disease has created a world-wide pandemic which will likely persist until a very large percentage of people become immune from surviving infection or effective vaccination.

The COVID-19 outbreak seems to have arisen in Wuhan, China. What was special about this location? This city has “wet markets” that are typically large collections of open-air stalls selling seafood, meat, fruits, and vegetables. Some wet markets sell and slaughter live animals on site, including chickens, fish, and shellfish. The Wuhan markets, for example, had a wild animal section where live and slaughtered species, such as bats and pangolins, were for sale. Typically, such markets are very unsanitary, and splattering of water and blood could readily spread potentially zoonotic organisms to people.

If such markets are a source for animal pathogens to spread to humans, we can expect a continuing public health problem. Wet markets are found throughout Asia and other parts of the world.

The research report you will review examines the possible animal origin of COVID-19. The purpose of the report is to show how COVID-19 might have emerged and why its origin is important to know. The report also reflects the fact that scientific research is not limited to studies where a hypothesis leads to experimental designs that test whether or not the hypothesis is wrong. While hypothesis testing is the bedrock foundation of science, it is not all of science. The report that you will review organizes what we think we know about COVID-19 and how the authors logically evaluate that information. Such approaches also count as scientific research.

Download PDF

Download the adapted journal article and conduct a review of its contents.

Using the guidance provided by your teacher and within the article, work individually or as a group to supply analysis for each indicated section within this article.

At different points in the paper, you will see some questions. Cut and paste these questions into the report you are going to prepare on your local device. You should make notes on what you think the answer is for each question and later file a report of your answers to each of these questions to your teacher.

You will submit your report as directed by the teacher. If you are working in a group, develop a group answer. Google docs is a useful platform where you can share your response with the group.

Download Article

You have now read an adapted scholarly journal article on separate the DNA bases. Before you begin the simulated peer review, let’s first check your understanding and knowledge about what you just read. Below you will be asked to provide a response to a question related to the adapted article. Use your best judgement and write-in the response that you feel best answers the question. You will receive feedback on your response.

Time’s up

For your convenience, here is the complete list of questions. You will complete this simulated peer review off-line. You can download this pdf and convert it to a text document where you can use whatever space needed to supply your answers. Or you can cut and paste from the screen display and create a fresh text document off-line.

Download PDF