Year: 2026 | Month: August | Volume 16 | Issue 4
Nipah Virus Transmission at the Human-Animal Interface: A One Health Scoping Review
Muhammad Al-Amin Ado1*
Sonali Padha1
Bukar Mustapha2
Qusina Beigh3
Omer Mohi U Din Sofi4 and Jameel Ahmad5
DOI:10.30954/2277-940X.04.2026.1
Abstract:
Nipah Virus (NiV) is a highly pathogenic zoonotic virus with pandemic potential but has limited synthetic evidence on its epidemiology, transmission dynamics, and One Health dimensions. This scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines to identify literature from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Semantic Scholar databases from 1998 to 2025. Of the 988 studies screened, 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. The geographic distribution is centred around Bangladesh with 20 studies and India with 12 studies. Outbreaks occurred with distinct patterns: the Malaysia-Singapore outbreak with pig as the animal host, Bangladesh-India with date palm sap as the transmission agent, and the Philippines with horse as the animal host. Pteropus bats were identified as the primary animal host with 17 primary studies confirming their role as the reservoir host. Human-to-human transmission accounts for one-third of cases. Phylogenetic analysis has identified two major clusters with NiV-M and NiV-B being the dominant clusters with an emerging Indian cluster designated as NiV-I. Only 34 studies used the One Health approach, but integration is limited because of institutional barriers, surveillance challenges, and resource limitations. NiV remains a geographically limited but epidemiologically relevant threat because of a complex transmission network. There is a pressing need to improve integrated surveillance, economically driven interventions in communities, and cross-sector response capacity to address the threat of future spillover.
Highlights
- NiV transmission occurs via multiple pathways: bat-to-human, pig amplification, horse spillover, and human-to-human
- Two major clades (NiV-M, NiV-B) and an emerging Indian variant (NiV-I) exist; NiV-B has higher CFR (77% vs. 40%) and greater human-to-human transmission.
- One Health integration remains limited; institutional fragmentation, surveillance gaps, and resource constraints require strengthened cross-sectoral collaboration.
© This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Print This Article Email This Article to Your Friend
