Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40630108›Full record

ReviewOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2025

One Health interventions and challenges under rural African smallholder farmer settings: A scoping review.

Evanson R Omuse, Honest Machekano, Bonoukpoè M Sokame, Daniel M Mutyambai, Thomas Dubois, Sevgan Subramanian, Frank Chidawanyika

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

7 authors.

Evanson R OmuseInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Honest MachekanoDepartment of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20, Hatfield 0028, South Africa.
Bonoukpoè M SokameInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Daniel M MutyambaiInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Thomas DuboisInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Sevgan SubramanianInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Frank ChidawanyikaInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global human population is rapidly increasing, escalating interactions of people, animals and the environment. This has led to more convoluted health challenges, for which African smallholder farmers bear the brunt. The One Health (OH) approach recognises the interconnectedness of these health challenges and thus follows a transdisciplinary approach involving diverse stakeholders to address them. Although there have recently been global concerted efforts and studies on OH, an information gap exists in Africa, particularly regarding smallholder farmers and their needs. Additionally, evaluation frameworks and outcome metrics for OH initiatives are still unclear. Thus, this study was conducted to critically map the available evidence of OH initiatives in the lens of African smallholder settings and identify gaps and opportunities for optimally targeted interventions. An extensive article searches yielded 1479 references, with only 21 studies from 11 countries qualifying for this review. Implementation of OH initiatives involved the collaboration of diverse stakeholders at local, national, regional and global levels. Most of the reported stakeholders of the OH initiatives were largely UN agencies, CGIAR centres, non-governmental organizations and universities. More than half of the studies focused on zoonotic and human-animal shared diseases. Conversely, few studies focused on human or animal food and nutrition security; land degradations; livelihoods and well-being; antimicrobial resistance, water sanitation and hygiene; food safety; soil health; crop health; biodiversity loss; climate change and gender equity. Effective capacity building, risk mitigation, social benefits, economic benefits, improved animal health and welfare, improved human health and well-being and improved ecosystem health and resilience were identified as OH outcomes. Based on the many evidence gaps, the OH initiatives must address health challenges mostly encountered by smallholder farmers with an increased focus on food security and safety, especially under the ongoing climate change. However, the successful implementation of OH initiatives was constrained by weak governance and coordination structures, poor communication and information sharing, lack of integrated surveillance system, limited community engagement, lack of political will, inadequate resources and logistical support, limited multi-disciplinarity and divergent priorities. Additionally, the lack of consensus on evaluation framework and outcomes highlights the need for an integrated standard framework for developing and implementing OH initiatives and harmonised outcome evaluation metrics to avoid under- or over-estimation of OH benefits.

Indexed as

Capacity buildingEnvironmental tipping pointsFood securityParticipatory developmentPlanetary healthPublic health

Identifiers

PMID40630108
PMCPMC12235736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.