ArticleBMC public health2025
One Health preparedness and response for mosquito-borne viruses: a stakeholder- and social network-analysis in the Netherlands.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Connecting the Dots: Systems Thinking Highlights the Role of the Environment Sector in One Health Operationalization.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2025Article
- A general population KAP survey: supporting the design of interventions and tiger mosquito control efforts in response to arbovirus emergence in non-endemic areas.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- The outbreak, response, and reflections on the chikungunya fever epidemic in Foshan City, China.Global health research and policy · 2025Article
- Integrated mosquito control in Matatang village, Northern Zhejiang, China: an effectiveness assessment.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe emergence of mosquito-borne viruses (MBVs) in Europe emphasizes the need for preparedness and response plans. This requires knowledge integration and collaboration across the human, animal, vector, and environmental health domains, aligning with the One Health approach. Despite the importance of a One Health approach, engaging stakeholders from each domain remains challenging. This study aims to identify stakeholders in the field of preparedness and response to MBVs in the Netherlands and map collaborations, knowledge- and information-sharing between these stakeholders, their domains and governance levels. In addition, we aim to identify bottlenecks in these networks and uncover underlying reasons.
methodsThis study combined stakeholder- and social network analysis. Stakeholders were identified through document analysis and snowballing. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eligible stakeholders. Stakeholders' collaborations, dependencies, and their roles in MBV preparedness and response were discussed. Interviewees not currently active in MBV policy were given the opportunity to share their experiences regarding 'zoonotic infectious diseases' or 'healthy living environments'. Interview transcripts were coded to identify collaborations and information- and knowledge sharing between stakeholders. Stakeholders were categorized into domains (animal, vector, human, environment, other) and governance levels (international, national, regional, local, other). Networks were visualized and analysed using Cytoscape and R.
resultsStakeholder analysis identified 87 stakeholders who influence or are (likely to be) influenced by MBV preparedness and response, of whom 47 were identified as having an active role in the MBV interaction network. Network visualisation unveiled 153 connections among these 47 stakeholders, encompassing all domains and governance levels but showed underrepresentation of regional, local and environmental stakeholders. Transcript analysis revealed low urgency for MBVs among these stakeholders as an underlying reason for their underrepresentation in the MBV interaction network. Analysis and visualisation of the networks for the other two themes ("healthy living environment" and "(zoonotic) infectious diseases") did show multiple connections with environmental and regional/local stakeholders.
conclusionsThe underrepresentation of the environment domain, regional and local stakeholders in the MBV preparedness and response network underlines the remaining challenge of including all relevant stakeholders. We recommend utilising existing collaborations, identified in this study, and central stakeholders to overcome these bottlenecks.
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.