ReviewOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2025
Systematic review on evaluation tools applicable to One Health surveillance systems: A call for adapted methodology.
Review in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 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.
- Mapping one health surveillance and networks for vector-borne disease prevention and control in Europe - A scoping review.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Review
- Closed-loop artificial intelligence agents for animal epidemic prediction and decision support in livestock farming: a review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- A framework for evaluating implementation, impact, and cost-effectiveness of wastewater and environmental surveillance.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Preventive Immunology for Livestock and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases in the One Health Era: From Mechanistic Insights to Innovative Interventions.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Developing and implementing effective surveillance programs for infectious diseases (ID) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) requires the integration of information across relevant disciplines and sectors. Yet, establishing and sustaining collaboration at each step of the surveillance process, and modalities to translate integrated surveillance results into actions, are not well understood. This systematic review was designed to map and explore peer-reviewed tools that were either designed or used for evaluation of integrated surveillance systems for ID or AMR, and to identify the limitations of these tools and remaining methodological or knowledge gaps. A systematic search was conducted using keywords related to: "Evaluation", "Surveillance" and "One Health" in four databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CAB abstract) up to the 28th of October 2022. Articles were selected if they presented an evaluation tool for integrated surveillance systems for ID or AMR (methodological study) or an application of such a tool (case study). All selected articles went through a quality check using the MetaQAT tool. Of 25 articles retrieved, 13 presented a methodological study, while 12 described a case study. Three main types of evaluation were identified through 17 tools: theoretical, process and impact evaluations. Both methodological and case study papers predominantly considered organizational and operational aspects in their evaluation. Although costs and/or impacts were discussed in some case studies, only one article reported an economic impact analysis. Evaluation of One Health integration and multisectoral collaboration was included in four methodological and four case study articles. One major challenge identified in this systematic review is the lack of clear guidance and standardized criteria for the comprehensive evaluation of complex integrated surveillance systems. To overcome this, it is essential to develop, validate, and apply methodologies adapted to these evaluation needs.
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.