ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026
Needs assessment for national wildlife health programs.
Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Theory of change for building stronger wildlife health surveillance systems globally.The Lancet. Planetary health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wildlife health programs are essential for monitoring and managing wildlife populations, which in turn supports biodiversity, ecosystem stability, the economy, and public health. By conducting a comprehensive and systematic needs assessment, countries can ensure that their wildlife health initiatives and programs are fit for purpose and sustainable. This needs assessment tool aims to identify programmatic gaps and set priorities in developing or scaling up local and national wildlife health programs. The needs assessment was organized in four phases: planning, data gathering (through semi-structured interviews), data analysis and recommendations. The tool itself covers fundamental programmatic components, such as detection and identification of diseases, pathogens and toxic agents, information management, and analysis and communication. We assessed the performance of the first version of this tool, which was piloted in the Kingdom of Thailand and Republic of Rwanda, considering usability, adaptability, actionable insights, stakeholder feedback and continuous improvement. Based on the evidence gathered, we suggest an expansion of this tool to include the urgency and impact of addressing gaps and needs as well as implementation capacity (from none to very high) to support the prioritization of criteria within each component of a wildlife health program. This needs assessment can help identify priority areas for wildlife health program improvement, thereby optimizing the impact of investments.
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.