The Network for Evaluation of One Health: evidence-based added value of One Health

Haxton, Eva; Šinigoj, Špela; Rivière-Cinnamond, Ana

doi:10.3402/iee.v5.28164

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a strategic framework developed by WHO to manage Ebola virus and Marburg virus was adjusted for RVF (Rift Valley Fever) control as the outbreak followed a similar chronology of events [57] , [58] . Current initiatives include the Network for Evaluation of One Health, which brings together researchers across Europe to develop a protocol for systematic evaluation, compile case studies and conduct meta-analyses, and form policy recommendations [59] , as well as the Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE) [60] , which seeks to develop reporting guidelines and promote integration of information across the three main One Health sectors. If designed in coordination with decision makers, at scales from single disease programs to global intergovernmental agency collaboration, they may help build an evidence base around the value of One Health to move forward more integrated policies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating one health: Are we demonstrating effectiveness?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perceived benefits of a One Health approach are largely hinged on increasing public health efficiency and cost effectiveness through a better understanding of disease risk–through shared control and detection efforts, and results that benefit human, animal and ecosystem health. However, there have been few efforts to identify and systematize One Health metrics to assess these perceived efficiencies. Though emphasis on the evaluation of One Health has increased, widely cited benefits of One Health approaches have mainly been based on modeled projections, rather than outcomes of implemented interventions. We conducted a review of One Health literature to determine the current status of One Health frameworks and case studies reporting One Health metrics. Of 1839 unique papers, only 7 reported quantitative outcomes; these assessments did not follow shared methodology and several reviewed only intermediate outcomes. For others, the effectiveness of One Health approaches was often assumed without supporting evidence or determined subjectively. The absence of a standardized framework to capture metrics across disciplines, even in a generic format, may hinder the more widespread adoption of One Health among stakeholders. We review possible outcome metrics suitable for the future evaluation of One Health, noting the relevance of cost outcomes to the three main disciplines associated with One Health.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating one health: Are we demonstrating effectiveness?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Predicting human behaviour and how it may change over time is an additional challenge. An OH approach, based on complex or wicked problem solving methods [144] with transdisciplinary collaboration, warrants a better understanding, acceptance, integration and use of a broader set of assessment metrics, as promoted by NEOH [26].…”

Section: What Have Health Assessments Taught Us?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The added value resulting from the integration of relevant sciences in a system(s) approach to health is the focus of the Network for Evaluation of One Health (NEOH), a European Union (EU) Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) funded initiative (COST TD 1404) that has developed a framework and protocols for the evaluation of OH initiatives [26]. This paper stems from work conducted in NEOH.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roadmap to a One Health agenda 2030.

Queenan

Garnier²,

Nielsen³

et al. 2017

CABI Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current fragmented framework of health governance for humans, animals and environment, together with the conventional linear approach to solving current health problems, is failing to meet today's health challenges and is proving unsustainable. Advances in healthcare depend increasingly on intensive interventions, technological developments and expensive pharmaceuticals. The disconnect grows between human health, animal health and environmental and ecosystems health. Human development gains have come with often unrecognized negative externalities affecting ecosystems. Deterioration in biodiversity and ecosystem services threatens to reverse the health gains of the last century. A paradigm shift is urgently required to de-sectoralize human, animal, plant and ecosystem health and to take a more integrated approach to health, One Health (OH). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer a framework and unique opportunity for this. Through analysing individual SDGs, we argue the feasibility of an OH approach towards achieving them. Feasibility assessments and outcome evaluations are often constrained by sectoral politics within a national framework, historic possession of expertise, as well as tried and tested metrics. OH calls for a better understanding, acceptance and use of a broader and transdisciplinary set of assessment metrics. Key objectives of OH are presented: that humans reconnect with our natural past and accept our place in, and dependence on our planet's ecosystems; and that we recognize our dependence on ecosystem services, the impact of our development thereon and accept our responsibility towards future generations to address this. Several action points are proposed to meet these objectives.Keywords: One Health, Health governance, Health policy, Sustainable development goals, Ecosystems health, Global health, Planetary Health Review Methodology: We reviewed academic papers and on line resources for definitions of health for each sector (human, animal, wildlife, plant and ecosystem health). The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the official lists of diseases published by WHO and the OIE were collated and analysed for their suitability for an integrated approach to management. Selected SDGs were chosen as examples to demonstrate the feasibility of an integrated or one Health approach, which was supported by reviewing the relevant literature for each.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, many decision-makers in politics and science have demanded and promoted from agricultural science, veterinarian and human medicine, and environmental sciences, a common collaborative holistic strategy (the "One Health" approach) against the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria [51,220].…”

Section: "One Health" Crossing Biotopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, a holistic approach in the sense of "One Health" needs to be integrated into interdisciplinary research at the interface between humans and animals and their common environment [49][50][51][52]. In the framework of sustainable biotope infection control measures in pig housing conditions, hygienic stable environment, animal health, and food product safety to reduce the prevalence of resistant bacteria remains challenging in pig production [53].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reservoirs and Transmission Pathways of Resistant Indicator Bacteria in the Biotope Pig Stable and along the Food Chain: A Review from a One Health Perspective

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The holistic approach of “One Health” includes the consideration of possible links between animals, humans, and the environment. In this review, an effort was made to highlight knowledge gaps and various factors that contribute to the transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria between these three reservoirs. Due to the broad scope of this topic, we focused on pig production and selected “indicator bacteria”. In this context, the role of the bacteria livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) and extended spectrum beta-lactamases carrying Escherichia coli (ESBL-E) along the pig production was particularly addressed. Hotspots of their prevalence and transmission are, for example, pig stable air for MRSA, or wastewater and manure for ESBL-E, or even humans as vectors in close contact to pigs (farmers and veterinarians). Thus, this review focuses on the biotope “stable environment” where humans and animals are both affected, but also where the end of the food chain is not neglected. We provide basic background information about antibiotics in livestock, MRSA, and ESBL-bacteria. We further present studies (predominantly European studies) in tabular form regarding the risk potentials for the transmission of resistant bacteria for humans, animals, and meat differentiated according to biotopes. However, we cannot guarantee completeness as this was only intended to give a broad superficial overview. We point out sustainable biotope approaches to try to contribute to policy management as critical assessment points in pig housing conditions, environmental care, animal health, and food product safety and quality as well as consumer acceptance have already been defined.

show abstract

The Network for Evaluation of One Health: evidence-based added value of One Health

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluating one health: Are we demonstrating effectiveness?

Evaluating one health: Are we demonstrating effectiveness?

Roadmap to a One Health agenda 2030.

Reservoirs and Transmission Pathways of Resistant Indicator Bacteria in the Biotope Pig Stable and along the Food Chain: A Review from a One Health Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About