Articlenpj antimicrobials and resistance2026
Mind the governance gap: a one health scoping review of national AMR performance indicators.
Article in npj antimicrobials and resistance, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite several initiatives to benchmark national action in responding to antimicrobial resistance (AMR), no comprehensive inventory exists of indicators used across these efforts. We present a scoping review that maps and synthesises existing indicators used to assess national performance in addressing AMR. We conducted a review of academic and grey literature to identify quantitative and qualitative indicators used to assess national AMR performance across animal, environmental, and human health sectors. The academic search was conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Global Health. The grey literature search was conducted across multilateral organisations (e.g., WHO, FAO, WOAH, UNEP, OECD) and think-tanks. We categorised indicators into a thematic framework spanning 19 subdomains within three overarching domains: Governance & Leadership, Action Areas, and Monitoring & Evaluation. From 184 academic studies, we identified 2311 indicators, and 1406 from 48 grey literature sources. In total, 2101 were in human health, 675 in animal health, 232 in environmental health, and 709 were multisectoral. Within the three overarching domains, 281 were Governance & Leadership, 1907 were Action Areas, and 1671 were Monitoring & Evaluation indicators. When grouping indicators by subdomain, Surveillance & Laboratory (1427), Stewardship (765), and Prevention & Control (365) accounted for the largest volumes, followed by Social Determinants (232), Reporting (141), and Workforce (140), in contrast to Accountability (22), Transparency (22), and Equity (29). This comprehensive scoping review provides a One Health inventory of 3717 indicators used to assess national performance in responding to AMR. While revealing robust Surveillance & Laboratory, Prevention & Control, and Stewardship metrics, we identify critical gaps in Accountability, Transparency, and Equity. These measures comprise the Governance & Leadership domain, which is essential for policy implementation.
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.