Table 8 Pros and cons of strategies A, B, and C in terms of results and costs
Strategies description | PROS | CONS |
|---|---|---|
Strategy A (pathogen detection in female ticks collected all over the year) | Good general pathogen detection in the area Good identification of risk sites Good pathogen prevalence assessment | No detection of sporadic pathogens High loss of single pathogen detections per site Low reduction of general costs (30%) No reduction of travel costs |
Strategy B (pathogen detection in all ticks collected in the period April-June) | Excellent pathogen detection in the area Excellent pathogen prevalence assessment Low loss of single pathogen determination per site High reduction of travel costs (62%) | Medium efficiency in identifying risk sites Low reduction of laboratory costs (33%) |
| Â | Detection of sporadic pathogens | Â |
Strategy C (pathogen detection in female ticks collected in the period April-June) | Good general pathogen detection in the area High reduction of general and specific costs (64%) | Low efficiency of pathogen prevalence assessment at local level Non detection of sporadic pathogens High loss of pathogen detection per site |