ReviewEcoHealth2018
Quantitative Outcomes of a One Health approach to Study Global Health Challenges.
Review in EcoHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of One Health interventions 2005-2025: What has been done, are they effective, and what are the best practices?One health outlook · 2026Article
- Innovating for One Health: federal perspectives and key lessons on building integrative programs for wildlife in Canada.One health outlook · 2026Article
- Relevance of Management Science in the One Health Paradigm.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026Article
- One Health interventions and challenges under rural African smallholder farmer settings: A scoping review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Review
- A framework for quantifying the multisectoral burden of animal disease to support decision making.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- How studies on zoonotic risks in wildlife implement the one health approach - A systematic review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Review
- Current evidence of the economic value of One Health initiatives: A systematic literature review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Review
- Using a Stakeholder Analysis to Implement the Belgian One Health National Report for Antimicrobial Use and Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Capacity for One Health research in the Horn of Africa.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- A one health glossary to support communication and information exchange between the human health, animal health and food safety sectors.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Quantitatively evaluating the cross-sectoral and One Health impact of interventions: A scoping review and case study of antimicrobial resistance.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Assessment of Evaluation Tools for Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Use and Resistance Based on Selected Case Studies.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Evaluating the Integration of One Health in Surveillance Systems for Antimicrobial Use and Resistance: A Conceptual Framework.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Ecosystem perspectives are needed to manage zoonotic risks in a changing climate.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2020Article
- Accounting for One Health: Insights from the social sciences.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2020Article
- The Veterinary Immunological Toolbox: Past, Present, and Future.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
- Article
- A Systems Approach to Evaluate One Health Initiatives.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2018Article
- A planetary vision for one health.BMJ global health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Having gained momentum in the last decade, the One Health initiative promotes a holistic approach to address complex global health issues. Before recommending its adoption to stakeholders, however, it is paramount to first compile quantitative evidence of the benefit of such an approach. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and summarize primary research that describes monetary and non-monetary outcomes following adoption of a One Health approach. An extensive literature search yielded a total of 42,167 references, of which 85 were included in the final analysis. The top two biotic health issues addressed in these studies were rabies and malaria; the top abiotic health issue was air pollution. Most studies described collaborations between human and animal (n = 42), or human and environmental disciplines (n = 41); commonly reported interventions included vector control and animal vaccination. Monetary outcomes were commonly expressed as cost-benefit or cost-utility ratios; non-monetary outcomes were described using disease frequency or disease burden measurements. The majority of the studies reported positive or partially positive outcomes. This paper illustrates the variety of health challenges that can be addressed using a One Health approach, and provides tangible quantitative measures that can be used to evaluate future implementations of the One Health approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.