ArticleBMC veterinary research2026
Assessing Malawi's animal health surveillance system using the FAO surveillance evaluation tool: gaps, strengths, and opportunities for one health resilience.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
methodsAnimal health surveillance is essential for early disease detection, outbreak response, and the prevention of zoonoses. In June 2024, Malawi conducted its first national assessment of its animal health surveillance system using the FAO Surveillance Evaluation Tool (SET), specifically the 2024 SET Evaluation Guide, version 2 to evaluate institutional, operational, and technical capacities. A participatory assessment was undertaken by experts from the Department of Animal Health and Livestock Development (DAHLD) and FAO, involving document reviews, stakeholder interviews, and site visits in seven districts. The SET was used to score 96 indicators across various domains on a scale of 1 (no capacity) to 4 (advanced).
resultsThe results indicated low overall performance. The weakest domains were active surveillance (5%), internal communication (12.6%), and risk assessment (16.7%). Relative strengths were observed in external communication (50%) and information systems (44.3%), though these were still below optimal levels. The system suffers from significant workforce shortages, with approximately 33% of officer positions vacant, placing a heavy burden on inadequately resourced community-based assistants. Laboratory capacity was found to be centralized and limited, with regional laboratories offering only basic diagnostic services. Data management is predominantly paper-based, and formal risk-based surveillance plans and feedback mechanisms are lacking. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: In conclusion, while Malawi's animal health surveillance system has an established institutional framework, it is weakly structured and inconsistently operationalized. This is characterized by limited proactive surveillance, significant workforce gaps, under-resourced laboratory diagnostics, and fragmented data and communication channels. Nonetheless, a foundation for improvement exists, including legal provisions, a dedicated Epidemiology Unit within DAHLD, and a tiered surveillance workforce. Prioritized recommendations include developing and operationalizing a national surveillance strategy, strengthening laboratory and data systems, addressing critical workforce gaps, and integrating animal health surveillance into broader One Health and emergency preparedness frameworks.
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.