ArticleBMJ open2026
Implementing One Health governance approaches to mitigate antimicrobial resistance across institutional, social, economic and political contexts: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAntimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a serious threat across human, animal and environmental health. The One Health approach emphasises multisectoral collaboration and is critical in addressing AMR. While One Health governance has gained recognition from international organisations, there remains limited understanding of how it can be effectively implemented across institutional, social, economic and political contexts. This scoping review aims to explore the design and implementation of One Health governance across contexts.
designScoping review DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature sources in December 2024, updating our search in March 2026. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible sources included empirical and conceptual work on One Health governance. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We searched for and screened documents and extracted data following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We then applied qualitative analysis to examine governance mechanisms; implementation contexts; conceptualisations of effectiveness; evidence of effectiveness and key barriers and facilitators.
resultsWe included 171 documents from over 50 countries. We explored six dimensions of One Health governance: participation, leadership, coordination, decision-making, resourcing and accountability. Existing governance structures and wider aspects of country context shaped One Health governance. While there was broad agreement on the goals of One Health governance-namely, to support disease prevention, detection and response-empirical evidence on effective approaches was relatively limited. Facilitators included strong political will and crisis-driven momentum, while barriers included siloed systems, sectoral dominance, limited accountability, inadequate funding and lack of institutionalisation.
conclusionsThis review highlights the range of approaches to One Health governance that exist and outlines how context may shape the design and implementation of One Health governance. Evaluative research should further explore which approaches to One Health governance are most effective in specific contexts. These insights are particularly relevant for AMR, where sustained cross-sectoral governance beyond outbreak-driven responses is essential to counter the 'silent pandemic'.
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.