Quantitative Outcomes of a One Health approach to Study Global Health Challenges

Current evidence of the economic value of One Health initiatives: A systematic literature review

Funding and financing for One Health initiatives at country level remain challenging as investments commonly require demonstrated evidence of economic value or returns. The objectives of this review were to i) identify, critically analyse and summarise quantitative evidence of the net economic value of One Health initiatives; ii) document methodologies commonly used in the scientific literature; and iii) describe common challenges and any evidence gaps. Scientific databases were searched for published literature following the PRISMA guidelines and an online survey and workshop with subject matter experts were used to identify relevant grey literature. Studies were included if they reported on quantitative costs and benefits (monetary and non-monetary) and were measured across at least two sectors. Relevant publications were analysed and plotted against the six action tracks of the Quadripartite One Health Joint Plan of Action to help classify the initiatives. Ninety-seven studies were included. Eighty studies involved only two sectors and 78 reported a positive economic value or return. Of those studies that reported a positive return, 49 did not compare with a sectoral counterfactual, 28 studies demonstrated an added value of using a cross-sectoral approach, and 6 studies demonstrated an added value of One Health communication, collaboration, coordination, and capacity building. Included studies most frequently related to endemic zoonotic, neglected tropical and vector-borne diseases, followed by health of the environment and food safety. However, diversity in economic analysis methodology between studies included resulted in difficulty to compare or combine findings. While there is a growing body of evidence of the value of One Health initiatives, a substantial part of the evidence still focuses on "traditional" One Health topics, particularly zoonoses. Developing a standardised and practical approach for One Health economic evaluation will facilitate assessment of the added value and gather evidence for One Health to be invested in and endorsed by multiple sectors.

Using a Stakeholder Analysis to Implement the Belgian One Health National Report for Antimicrobial Use and Resistance

(1) Background. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a substantial global health threat with profound economic implications. Acknowledging the imperative for a One Health (OH) strategy to combat this menace, Belgium introduced an annual national OH report, known as the "BELMAP report," encompassing antimicrobial use (AMU) and AMR, with the first edition completed in 2021. The integration of innovations for the healthcare system demands a meticulously planned process. (2) Methods. We introduced a three-step stakeholder analysis (SA) as a prospective framework for navigating this new report process, fostering complementary collaboration, pinpointing obstacles, suggesting approaches to overcome them, and facilitating national policy development. The SA unfolds in three steps: stakeholders identify and list their relevant activities, assess their positions regarding the BELMAP report, and complete "actor mapping" of national AMR and AMU stakeholders. (3) Results. Stakeholder identification reveals a fragmented landscape of AMR and AMU activities across Belgium. Assessment of stakeholder positions uncovers diverse expectations, collaborative challenges, and resource considerations. "Actor mapping" identifies key stakeholders, emphasizing the importance of high-interest and high-power actors. (4) Conclusions. This SA approach not only provides insights into the present stakeholder landscape in Belgium, it can also serve as a blueprint for other countries in the process of developing OH reports.

Capacity for One Health research in the Horn of Africa

Introduction

In low-and-middle-income countries, many people live near livestock. Rural livelihoods need improvement, however livestock-sector growth is a 'wicked' problem, needing careful management and One Health approaches which balance positive aspects of livestock ownership against deleterious impacts.

Materials and methods

A Key Informant survey was delivered to higher education and research institute Units in Horn of Africa, to quantify baseline estimates for One Health research, understand characteristics, and risk factors for usage.

Principal results

Four-fifths of Units acknowledged some One Health research; however, this was biased towards human-focused dimensions including at the human/animal/environment-interface and human/animal-interface; One Health approaches were also more often reported when all or the animal/environment dimensions were examined. We detected subject-bias impacting environment-focus in research; only research-focused Units had staff with higher environmental science degrees. Our work suggested good national research buy-in, and Units engaging with national policy-makers most often; local policy-makers were least engaged. Four-fifths of Units had laboratories, with two-thirds processing either human or animal samples and half processing both. Funding for equipment purchase, supplies and maintenance, staff training on technical/safety issues was nearly half that previously identified.

Major conclusions

The necessity for One Health research approaches is acknowledged, however our results suggest persistent and systemic neglect of the environment in approaches and research staff education, and a lack of integration across government hierarchies during policy-development, potentially driven by international organisation domination. Further, Units lack funding for laboratory equipment purchase/supplies/maintenance, and staff training on technical/safety issues.

A one health glossary to support communication and information exchange between the human health, animal health and food safety sectors

Collaboration across sectors, disciplines and countries is a key concept to achieve the overarching One Health (OH) objective for better human, animal and environmental health. Differences in terminology and interpretation of terms are still a significant hurdle for cross-sectoral information exchange and collaboration within the area of OH including One Health Surveillance (OHS). The development of the here described glossary is a collaborative effort of three projects funded within the One Health European Joint Programme (OHEJP). We describe the infrastructure of the OHEJP Glossary, as well as the methodology to create such a cross-sectoral web resource in a collaborative manner. The new OHEJP Glossary allows OH actors to identify terms with different or shared interpretation across sectors. Being aware of such differences in terminology will help overcome communication hurdles in the future and consequently support collaboration and a more inclusive development of OHS. The OHEJP Glossary was implemented as a web-based, user-friendly and searchable infrastructure that complies with the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) data principles. Maintenance, enrichment and quality control of the OHEJP Glossary is supported through a flexible and updatable curation infrastructure. This increases the uptake potential and exploitation of the OHEJP Glossary by other OH initiatives or tools and services.

Assessment of Evaluation Tools for Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Use and Resistance Based on Selected Case Studies

Regular evaluation of integrated surveillance for antimicrobial use (AMU) and resistance (AMR) in animals, humans, and the environment is needed to ensure system effectiveness, but the question is how. In this study, six different evaluation tools were assessed after being applied to AMU and AMR surveillance in eight countries: (1) ATLASS: the Assessment Tool for Laboratories and AMR Surveillance Systems developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, (2) ECoSur: Evaluation of Collaboration for Surveillance tool, (3) ISSEP: Integrated Surveillance System Evaluation Project, (4) NEOH: developed by the EU COST Action "Network for Evaluation of One Health," (5) PMP-AMR: The Progressive Management Pathway tool on AMR developed by the FAO, and (6) SURVTOOLS: developed in the FP7-EU project "RISKSUR." Each tool was scored using (i) 11 pre-defined functional aspects (e.g., workability concerning the need for data, time, and people); (ii) a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)-like approach of user experiences (e.g., things that I liked or that the tool covered well); and (iii) eight predefined content themes related to scope (e.g., development purpose and collaboration). PMP-AMR, ATLASS, ECoSur, and NEOH are evaluation tools that provide a scoring system to obtain semi-quantitative results, whereas ISSEP and SURVTOOLS will result in a plan for how to conduct evaluation(s). ISSEP, ECoSur, NEOH, and SURVTOOLS allow for in-depth analyses and therefore require more complex data, information, and specific training of evaluator(s). PMP-AMR, ATLASS, and ISSEP were developed specifically for AMR-related activities-only ISSEP included production of a direct measure for "integration" and "impact on decision making." NEOH and ISSEP were perceived as the best tools for evaluation of One Health (OH) aspects, and ECoSur as best for evaluation of the quality of collaboration. PMP-AMR and ATLASS seemed to be the most user-friendly tools, particularly designed for risk managers. ATLASS was the only tool focusing specifically on laboratory activities. Our experience is that adequate resources are needed to perform evaluation(s). In most cases, evaluation would require involvement of several assessors and/or stakeholders, taking from weeks to months to complete. This study can help direct future evaluators of integrated AMU and AMR surveillance toward the most adequate tool for their specific evaluation purpose.

Quantitatively evaluating the cross-sectoral and One Health impact of interventions: A scoping review and case study of antimicrobial resistance

BACKGROUND

Current frameworks evaluating One Health (OH) interventions focus on intervention-design and -implementation. Cross-sectoral impact evaluations are needed to more effectively tackle OH-issues, such as antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We aimed to describe quantitative evaluation methods for interventions related to OH and cross-sectoral issues, to propose an explicit approach for evaluating such interventions, and to apply this approach to AMR.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed using WebofScience, EconLit, PubMed and gray literature. Quantitative evaluations of interventions that had an impact across two or more of the human, animal and environment sectors were included. Information on the interventions, methods and outcome measures found was narratively summarised. The information from this review informed the construction of a new approach to OH-related intervention evaluation, which then was applied to the field of AMR.

RESULTS

The review included 90 studies: 73 individual evaluations (from 72 papers) and 18 reviews, with a range of statistical modelling (n = 13 studies), mathematical modelling (n = 53) and index-creation/preference-ranking (n = 14) methods discussed. The literature highlighted the need to (I) establish stakeholder objectives, (II) establish quantifiable outcomes that feed into those objectives, (III) establish agents and compartments that affect these outcomes and (IV) select appropriate methods (described in this review) accordingly. Based on this, an evaluation model for AMR was conceptualised; a decision-tree of intervention options, a compartmental-microeconomic model across sectors and a general-equilibrium (macroeconomic) model are linked. The outcomes of this multi-level model (including cost-utility and Gross Domestic Product impact) can then feed into multi-criteria-decision analyses that weigh respective impact estimates alongside other chosen outcome estimates (for example equity or uncertainty).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, stakeholder objectives are key in establishing which evaluation methods (and associated outcome measures) should be used for OH-related interventions. The stated multi-level approach also allows for sub-systems to be modelled in succession, where resources are constrained.

Evaluating the Integration of One Health in Surveillance Systems for Antimicrobial Use and Resistance: A Conceptual Framework

It is now widely acknowledged that surveillance of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) must adopt a "One Health" (OH) approach to successfully address the significant threats this global public health issue poses to humans, animals, and the environment. While many protocols exist for the evaluation of surveillance, the specific aspect of the integration of a OH approach into surveillance systems for AMR and antimicrobial Use (AMU), suffers from a lack of common and accepted guidelines and metrics for its monitoring and evaluation functions. This article presents a conceptual framework to evaluate the integration of OH in surveillance systems for AMR and AMU, named the Integrated Surveillance System Evaluation framework (ISSE framework). The ISSE framework aims to assist stakeholders and researchers who design an overall evaluation plan to select the relevant evaluation questions and tools. The framework was developed in partnership with the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS). It consists of five evaluation components, which consider the capacity of the system to: [1] integrate a OH approach, [2] produce OH information and expertise, [3] generate actionable knowledge, [4] influence decision-making, and [5] positively impact outcomes. For each component, a set of evaluation questions is defined, and links to other available evaluation tools are shown. The ISSE framework helps evaluators to systematically assess the different OH aspects of a surveillance system, to gain comprehensive information on the performance and value of these integrated efforts, and to use the evaluation results to refine and improve the surveillance of AMR and AMU globally.

Donkey assisted interventions: A pilot survey on service providers in North-Eastern Italy

CONTEXT

Animal Assisted Interventions (AAI), which are generally defined as 'pet therapy', focus on the improvement of human health and wellbeing through a multidisciplinary approach and the involvement of domestic animals. An Italian survey conducted in 2017 revealed that donkeys were the third most involved species in AAI. Nevertheless, data on the main features of the providers of Donkey Assisted Interventions (DAI), especially in Italy, and their organisational models are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

This questionnaire-based pilot study aimed to collect information about the features of DAI providers in the Veneto Region to have a general framework about the field.

STUDY METHOD

In this descriptive mixed-method pilot study, we interviewed DAI providers through a computer assisted telephone interview. Respondents were selected by integrating data from the Veneto Region Livestock Database and from the Italian official register of AAI professionals. The questionnaire was designed following the advice from Equator Network.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Our outcome measures included the prevalent organisational system adopted by our respondents, main type of AAI programs, and users. Furthermore, we collected qualitative data about economic and income and respondents' personal opinions about DAI (strengths and weaknesses).

MAIN RESULTS

Data analysis revealed a heterogeneous picture of the DAI field with a prevalence of non-profit organisations providing mainly Donkey Assisted Activities to a large range of user categories. Despite the poor economic framework and low income from DAI, DAI providers were strongly motivated and spent more time and efforts in delivering this service.

Accounting for One Health: Insights from the social sciences

This paper discusses the relationship between One Health (OH) and the social sciences. Using a comparison between three narratives of the history of OH, it is argued that OH can be studied as a social phenomenon. The narrative of OH by its promoters (folk narratives) emphasizes two dimensions: OH as a renewal of veterinary medicine and OH as an institutional response to global health crises. Narratives from empirical social science work explore similar dimensions, but make them more complex. For political sociology, OH is the result of negotiations between the three international organisations (WHO, OIE and FAO), in a context of a global health crisis, which led to the reconfiguration of their respective mandates and scope of action: OH is a response to an institutional crisis. For the sociology of science, OH testifies to the evolution of the profession and veterinary science, enabling it to position itself as a promoter of interdisciplinarity, in a context of convergence between research and policy. In the Discussion section, I propose an approach to OH as an “epistemic watchword”: a concept whose objective is to make several actors work together (watchword), in a particular direction, that of the production of knowledge (epistemic).

The effectiveness of the One Health SMART approach on dengue vector control in Majalengka, Indonesia

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to apply the OH-SMART approach on dengue vector control and assess the influence on knowledge, attitude, practice (KAP) amongst elementary students in Majalengka as well as check the dengue serotypes distribution.

Design/methodology/approach

This study was designed by sequential exploration. An OH-SMART workshop involving local government institutions, schools, colleges and health professional organizations was conducted. A total of 334 elementary students, chosen by cluster sampling, participated including 171 in the intervention group and 163 in the control group. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the differences in the subject's KAP. Dengue serotypes were analyzed by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and the distribution was measured by GPS. Descriptive statistics, paired t-test and the Wilcoxon rank test were used for data analysis.

Findings

There were eight gaps in Dengue vector control in Majalengka and three main recommendations after the OH-SMART workshop i.e. the formation of OH-teams, the preparation of module training, and training of vector control in the schools. After the program, there were statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups (p = 0,001, CI 95%). All differences in the intervention group were higher than in the control. The most commonly found dengue serotype was DEN-1.

Originality/value

OH-SMART has never been applied in Indonesia, especially in a local government setting but is recognized as an effective approach in the prevention of vector-borne disease and zoonotic.

The Veterinary Immunological Toolbox: Past, Present, and Future

It is well-recognized that research capability in veterinary species is restricted by a lack of immunological reagents relative to the extensive toolboxes for small rodent biomedical model species and humans. This creates a barrier to the strategic development of disease control solutions for livestock, companion animals and wildlife that not only affects animal health but can affect human health by increasing the risk of transmission of zoonotic pathogens. There have been a number of projects aimed at reducing the capability gaps in the veterinary immunological toolbox, the majority of these focusing on livestock species. Various approaches have been taken to veterinary immunological reagent development across the globe and technological advances in molecular biology and protein biochemistry have accelerated toolbox development. While short-term funding initiatives can address specific gaps in capability, they do not account for long-term sustainability of reagents and databases that requires a different funding model. We review the past, present and future of the veterinary immunological toolbox with specific reference to recent developments discussed at the International Union of Immunological Societies (IUIS) Veterinary Immunology Committee (VIC) Immune Toolkit Workshop at the 12th International Veterinary Immunology Symposium (IVIS) in Seattle, USA, 16–19 August 2019. The future availability of these reagents is critical to research for improving animal health, responses to infectious pathogens and vaccine design as well as for important analyses of zoonotic pathogens and the animal /human interface for One Health initiatives.

Integrative concepts and practices of health in transdisciplinary social ecology

Increasing recognition of interdependencies of the health of humans, other organisms and ecosystems, and of their importance to socio-ecological systems, necessitates application of integrative concepts such as One Health and EcoHealth. These concepts open new perspectives for research and practice but also generate confusion and divergent opinion, prompting new theories, and call for empirical clarification and evaluation. Through a semi-systematic evaluation of knowledge generation in scientific publications (comprised of literature reviews, conceptual models and analyses of communities of practice), we show how integrative concepts and approaches to health evolve and are adopted. Our findings indicate that while their contexts, goals and rationales vary, integrative concepts of health essentially arise from shared interests in living systems. Despite recent increased attention to ecological and societal aspects of health including broader sustainability issues, the focus remains anthropocentric and oriented towards biomedicine. Practices reflect and in turn transform these concepts, which together with practices also influence ways of integration. Overarching narratives vary between optimism and pessimism towards integrated health and knowledge. We conclude that there is an urgent need for better, coherent and more deeply integrative health concepts, approaches and practices to foster the well-being of humans, other animals and ecosystems. Consideration of these concepts and practices has methodological and political importance, as it will transform thinking and action on both society and nature and specifically can enrich science and practice, expanding their scope and linking them better. Transdisciplinary efforts are crucial to developing such concepts and practices to properly address the multiple facets of health and to achieve their appropriate integration for the socio-ecological systems at stake. We propose the term “transdisciplinary health” to denote the new approaches needed.

Clinical, Pathological, and Ethical Considerations for the Conduct of Clinical Trials in Dogs with Naturally Occurring Cancer: A Comparative Approach to Accelerate Translational Drug Development

The role of comparative oncology in translational research is receiving increasing attention from drug developers and the greater biomedical research community. Pet dogs with spontaneous cancer are important and underutilized translational models, owing to dogs' large size and relative outbreeding, combined with their high incidence of certain tumor histotypes with significant biological, genetic, and histological similarities to their human tumor counterparts. Dogs with spontaneous tumors naturally develop therapy resistance and spontaneous metastasis, all in the context of an intact immune system. These fundamental features of cancer biology are often lacking in induced or genetically engineered preclinical tumor models and likely contribute to their poor predictive value and the associated overall high failure rate in oncology drug development. Thus, the conduct of clinical trials in pet dogs with naturally occurring cancer represents a viable surrogate and valuable intermediary step that should be increasingly incorporated into the cancer drug discovery and development pipeline. The development of molecular-targeted therapies has resulted in an expanded role of the pathologist in human oncology trials, and similarly the expertise of veterinary pathologists will be increasingly valuable to all phases of comparative oncology trial design and conduct. In this review, we provide a framework of clinical, ethical, and pathology-focused considerations for the increasing integration of translational research investigations in dogs with spontaneous cancer as a means to accelerate clinical cancer discovery and drug development.

A Systems Approach to Evaluate One Health Initiatives

Challenges calling for integrated approaches to health, such as the One Health (OH) approach, typically arise from the intertwined spheres of humans, animals, and ecosystems constituting their environment. Initiatives addressing such wicked problems commonly consist of complex structures and dynamics. As a result of the EU COST Action (TD 1404) "Network for Evaluation of One Health" (NEOH), we propose an evaluation framework anchored in systems theory to address the intrinsic complexity of OH initiatives and regard them as subsystems of the context within which they operate. Typically, they intend to influence a system with a view to improve human, animal, and environmental health. The NEOH evaluation framework consists of four overarching elements, namely: (1) the definition of the initiative and its context, (2) the description of the theory of change with an assessment of expected and unexpected outcomes, (3) the process evaluation of operational and supporting infrastructures (the "OH-ness"), and (4) an assessment of the association(s) between the process evaluation and the outcomes produced. It relies on a mixed methods approach by combining a descriptive and qualitative assessment with a semi-quantitative scoring for the evaluation of the degree and structural balance of "OH-ness" (summarised in an OH-index and OH-ratio, respectively) and conventional metrics for different outcomes in a multi-criteria-decision-analysis. Here, we focus on the methodology for Elements (1) and (3) including ready-to-use Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for the assessment of the "OH-ness". We also provide an overview of Element (2), and refer to the NEOH handbook for further details, also regarding Element (4) (http://neoh.onehealthglobal.net). The presented approach helps researchers, practitioners, and evaluators to conceptualise and conduct evaluations of integrated approaches to health and facilitates comparison and learning across different OH activities thereby facilitating decisions on resource allocation. The application of the framework has been described in eight case studies in the same Frontiers research topic and provides first data on OH-index and OH-ratio, which is an important step towards their validation and the creation of a dataset for future benchmarking, and to demonstrate under which circumstances OH initiatives provide added value compared to disciplinary or conventional health initiatives.