ArticleBMJ global health2026
Evaluation of a One Health programme to address antimicrobial resistance in Pacific Island Countries: a mixed-methods study.
Article in BMJ global health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant organisms is a major global health challenge. We report on the approach and outcomes of a programme which aimed to take a One Health approach, incorporating an understanding that the health of humans, animals and the environment are linked. Combating the Threat of Antimicrobial Resistance in Pacific Island Countries (COMBAT-AMR) was funded by the Australian Department of Foreign Trade and designed to build capacity across human and animal health to address the threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Fiji, Samoa, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands between 2020 and 2023.Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with implementers, key stakeholders and participants across the programme themes (n=53). Evaluation of specific activities included participant surveys, competency assessments and document reviews.Both the human health and animal health sectors made significant progress in capacity-building and mentoring of local staff and collection and analysis of surveillance data. However, the sectors largely operated in parallel, with limited planning or resources allocated for explicit intersectoral activities. Resources allocated to animal health were also insufficient to compensate for under-resourced animal health sectors in comparison to human health sectors in the target countries.The increasing use of One Health approaches to address AMR necessitates careful consideration of strategies to support intersectoral collaboration at the design and implementation stages. The comprehensive evaluation of the COMBAT-AMR programme contributes to the current evidence base regarding operationalising One Health principles in building capacity in AMR in low- and middle-income countries.
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.