Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37940941›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2023

Policies to prevent zoonotic spillover: a systematic scoping review of evaluative evidence.

Chloe Clifford Astbury, Kirsten M Lee, Ryan Mcleod, Raphael Aguiar, Asma Atique, Marilen Balolong, Janielle Clarke, Anastassia Demeshko, Ronald Labonté, Arne Ruckert and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

17 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Chloe Clifford AstburySchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kirsten M LeeSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ryan McleodSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Raphael AguiarDahdaleh Institute for Global Health Research, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Asma AtiqueSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marilen BalolongApplied Microbiology for Health and Environment Research Group, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines.
Janielle ClarkeSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Anastassia DemeshkoSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ronald LabontéSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Arne RuckertSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Priyanka SibalSchool of Health Policy and Management, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kathleen Chelsea TogñoApplied Microbiology for Health and Environment Research Group, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines.
A M ViensSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Mary WiktorowiczSchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marc K YambayambaSchool of Public Health, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Amy YauDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Tarra L PenneySchool of Global Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada. tpenney@yorku.ca.
York University · CACentre for Global Health Research · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CAUniversity of the Philippines Manila · PHLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Kinshasa · CD

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/V004832/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmerging infectious diseases of zoonotic origin present a critical threat to global population health. As accelerating globalisation makes epidemics and pandemics more difficult to contain, there is a need for effective preventive interventions that reduce the risk of zoonotic spillover events. Public policies can play a key role in preventing spillover events. The aim of this review is to identify and describe evaluations of public policies that target the determinants of zoonotic spillover. Our approach is informed by a One Health perspective, acknowledging the inter-connectedness of human, animal and environmental health.

methodsIn this systematic scoping review, we searched Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Global Health in May 2021 using search terms combining animal health and the animal-human interface, public policy, prevention and zoonoses. We screened titles and abstracts, extracted data and reported our process in line with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We also searched relevant organisations' websites for evaluations published in the grey literature. All evaluations of public policies aiming to prevent zoonotic spillover events were eligible for inclusion. We summarised key data from each study, mapping policies along the spillover pathway.

resultsOur review found 95 publications evaluating 111 policies. We identified 27 unique policy options including habitat protection; trade regulations; border control and quarantine procedures; farm and market biosecurity measures; public information campaigns; and vaccination programmes, as well as multi-component programmes. These were implemented by many sectors, highlighting the cross-sectoral nature of zoonotic spillover prevention. Reports emphasised the importance of surveillance data in both guiding prevention efforts and enabling policy evaluation, as well as the importance of industry and private sector actors in implementing many of these policies. Thoughtful engagement with stakeholders ranging from subsistence hunters and farmers to industrial animal agriculture operations is key for policy success in this area.

conclusionThis review outlines the state of the evaluative evidence around policies to prevent zoonotic spillover in order to guide policy decision-making and focus research efforts. Since we found that most of the existing policy evaluations target 'downstream' determinants, additional research could focus on evaluating policies targeting 'upstream' determinants of zoonotic spillover, such as land use change, and policies impacting infection intensity and pathogen shedding in animal populations, such as those targeting animal welfare.

Indexed as

Communicable Diseases, EmergingZoonosesAnimalsGlobal HealthHumansPolicyPolicy MakingDeep preventionEmerging zoonosesEvaluationOne healthPublic policyZoonotic spillover

Identifiers

PMID37940941
PMCPMC10634115
OpenAlexW4388499964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.