Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34210688›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2021

Operationalisation of consensual One Health roadmaps in countries for improved IHR capacities and health security.

Stephane de la Rocque, Guillaume Belot, Kaylee Marie Myhre Errecaborde, Rajesh Sreedharan, Artem Skrypnyk, Tanja Schmidt, Nicolas Isla, Tieble Traore, Ambrose Talisuna, Gyanendra Gongal and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Stephane de la RocqueHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland delarocques@who.int.
Guillaume BelotHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Kaylee Marie Myhre ErrecabordeHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rajesh SreedharanHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Artem SkrypnykCountry Health Emergency Preparedness & IHR, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tanja SchmidtCountry Health Emergency Preparedness & IHR, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nicolas IslaCountry Health Emergency Preparedness & IHR, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tieble TraoreEmergency Preparedness, WHO Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville, Congo.
Ambrose TalisunaEmergency Preparedness, WHO Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville, Congo.ORCID 0000-0001-6436-3415
Gyanendra GongalHealthier Populations & Noncommunicable Diseases, WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia, New Delhi, India.
Dalia SamhouriCountry Health Emergency Preparedness & IHR, WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, Cairo, Egypt.
François CayaCapacity Building Department, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France.
Maud CarronCapacity Building Department, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France.
Nirmal KandelHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jun XingHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Stella ChungongHealth Emergencies Programme, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is a devastating reminder that mitigating the threat of emerging zoonotic outbreaks relies on our collective capacity to work across human health, animal health and environment sectors. Despite the critical need for shared approaches, collaborative benchmarks in the International Health Regulations (IHR) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and more specifically the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) often reveal low levels of performance in collaborative technical areas (TAs), thus identifying a real need to work on the human-animal-environment interface to improve health security. The National Bridging Workshops (NBWs) proposed jointly by the World Organisation of Animal Health and World Health Organization (WHO) provide opportunity for national human health, animal health, environment and other relevant sectors in countries to explore the efficiency and gaps in their coordination for the management of zoonotic diseases. The results, gathered in a prioritised roadmap, support the operationalisation of the recommendations made during JEE for TAs where a multisectoral One Health approach is beneficial. For those collaborative TAs (12 out of 19 in the JEE), more than two-thirds of the recommendations can be implemented through one or multiple activities jointly agreed during NBW. Interestingly, when associated with the WHO Benchmark Tool for IHR, it appears that NBW activities are often associated with lower level of performance than anticipated during the JEE missions, revealing that countries often overestimate their capacities at the human-animal-environment interface. Deeper, more focused and more widely shared discussions between professionals highlight the need for concrete foundations of multisectoral coordination to meet goals for One Health and improved global health security through IHR.

Indexed as

COVID-19One HealthAnimalsHumansInternational CooperationInternational Health RegulationsPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19diseasesdisordershealth policyhealth systemsinfectionsinjuriespublic health

Identifiers

PMID34210688
PMCPMC8252684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.