Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40229847›Full record

ArticleOne health outlook2025

Setting-based surveillance and One Health in the Mpox response.

Marc K Yambayamba, Simon Rüegg

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in One health outlook, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mpox and the one health approach.Dialogues in health · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Marc K YambayambaSection of Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. marc.yambayamba@uzh.ch.
Simon RüeggSection of Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The resurgence of Mpox (MPXV) provides an opportunity to reflect on global health responses, particularly the lessons from previous outbreaks like Ebola and COVID-19. Although Mpox has been endemic in parts of Africa since the 1970s, it only gained global attention after spreading beyond Africa, highlighting the geopolitical dimension of global health. Like Ebola, Mpox is a zoonotic disease that affects both humans and animals, but the focus of the response has often been on human health, neglecting the broader social-ecological factors that influence disease transmission. A more holistic, "One Health" approach, integrating human, animal, and environmental health can help better understand the complex interactions that contribute to outbreaks. This would include surveillance of the social-ecological systems where spillover occurs and greater engagement with local communities to build trust and improve response efforts. A setting-based surveillance system, focusing on both humans and animals in their environments, would enable more accurate and efficient outbreak or pandemic prevention. Additionally, the involvement of non-health professionals, such as social scientists and community leaders, is essential for fostering locally driven, culturally sensitive response strategies. Strengthening one health systems and expanding healthcare to include animals and plants could also enhance agroecological and ecosystem resilience.

Identifiers

PMID40229847
PMCPMC11998188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.