ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Evaluation of the One Health-Ness of 20 Years of Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance in Norway.
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Economic methods and spatial scales in One Health: Results from a scoping review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Review
- Molecular epidemiology of methicillin-resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Implementation of One Health surveillance systems: Opportunities and challenges - lessons learned from the OH-EpiCap application.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the One Health-ness (OH-ness) of the surveillance system for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Norway by using the recently developed "Evaluation tool for One Health epidemiological surveillance capacities and capabilities" (OH-EpiCap tool). First, we defined the Norwegian AMR surveillance system that we would evaluate. The tool was applied by a group of stakeholders (key persons in the Norwegian AMR surveillance programmes and authors of this paper). The evaluation was performed using a consensus approach. The evaluation resulted in an overall OH-ness score of 68% across all three dimensions included in the tool: Organisation, Operation, and Impact. Suggestions for improvement were only indicated within the areas of internal evaluation and operational costs, whereas most of the indicators included in the tool showed good adherence to the One Health principles. By performing this internal evaluation, we recognized that AMR surveillance in the environment needs to be included in a more systematic and standardized way to improve the OH-ness as defined by the quadripartite organisations. Last but not least, it was beneficial to bring key stakeholders together to conduct the evaluation. It increased a joint perception of the OH-ness of AMR surveillance in Norway and encouraged further collaboration in the future.
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.