Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37196335›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of public health2023

The best laid plans?: international governance perspectives in AMR national action plans in Europe.

Daniel E Carelli, Elisavet T Mitsouli, Josefin B Ogne, Jon Pierre

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

4 authors.

Daniel E CarelliDepartment of Political Science, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Elisavet T MitsouliMinistry of Health, Republic of Greece.
Josefin B OgneSchool of Public Administration, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jon PierreDepartment of Political Science, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1523-3603

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a broad consensus in the European public health community that international collaboration and coordination are key in the fight against antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Yet, while experts typically testify the importance of cross-national learning and a coordinated effort to reduce the spread of multi-resistant bacteria, there are mixed views about how that is best realized in practice, particularly on the dichotomy between horizontal and vertical activities.

methodsNational action plans (NAP) from all EU member states were systematically overviewed by two independent researchers. We followed a fixed procedure for locating a broad and comparable content on the international dimensions, and letting these vary on scales.

resultsWe find that countries adhere to four different strategies for international coordination, varying between 'high' and 'low' on values of vertical and horizontal activities. Most countries spend none or very little space to discuss international activities, while some countries use their NAPs to outline their aspiration for taking leading roles in the international struggle. Moreover, in line with previous research, we find that many countries directly mimic the Global Action Plan, but also that a large share of countries describe independent arrangements in their international strategies.

conclusionsEuropean countries recognize AMR and its inherent international governance challenge differently in their NAPs, which may have implications for coordinated action to address the issue.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsPublic HealthDrug Resistance, BacterialEuropeEuropean UnionHumansAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID37196335
PMCPMC10393504

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.