Challenges calling for integrated approaches to health, such as the One Health (OH) approach, typically arise from the intertwined spheres of humans, animals, and ecosystems constituting their environment. Initiatives addressing such wicked problems commonly consist of complex structures and dynamics. As a result of the EU COST Action (TD 1404) “Network for Evaluation of One Health” (NEOH), we propose an evaluation framework anchored in systems theory to address the intrinsic complexity of OH initiatives and regard them as subsystems of the context within which they operate. Typically, they intend to influence a system with a view to improve human, animal, and environmental health. The NEOH evaluation framework consists of four overarching elements, namely: (1) the definition of the initiative and its context, (2) the description of the theory of change with an assessment of expected and unexpected outcomes, (3) the process evaluation of operational and supporting infrastructures (the “OH-ness”), and (4) an assessment of the association(s) between the process evaluation and the outcomes produced. It relies on a mixed methods approach by combining a descriptive and qualitative assessment with a semi-quantitative scoring for the evaluation of the degree and structural balance of “OH-ness” (summarised in an OH-index and OH-ratio, respectively) and conventional metrics for different outcomes in a multi-criteria-decision-analysis. Here, we focus on the methodology for Elements (1) and (3) including ready-to-use Microsoft Excel spreadsheets for the assessment of the “OH-ness”. We also provide an overview of Element (2), and refer to the NEOH handbook for further details, also regarding Element (4) (). The presented approach helps researchers, practitioners, and evaluators to conceptualise and conduct evaluations of integrated approaches to health and facilitates comparison and learning across different OH activities thereby facilitating decisions on resource allocation. The application of the framework has been described in eight case studies in the same Frontiers research topic and provides first data on OH-index and OH-ratio, which is an important step towards their validation and the creation of a dataset for future benchmarking, and to demonstrate under which circumstances OH initiatives provide added value compared to disciplinary or conventional health initiatives.

One Health (OH) positions health professionals as agents for change and provides a platform to manage determinants of health that are often not comprehensively captured in medicine or public health alone. However, due to the organization of societies and disciplines, and the sectoral allocation of resources, the development of transdisciplinary approaches requires effort and perseverance. Therefore, there is a need to provide evidence on the added value of OH for governments, researchers, funding bodies, and stakeholders. This paper outlines a conceptual framework of what OH approaches can encompass and the added values they can provide. The framework was developed during a workshop conducted by the “Network for Evaluation of One Health,” an Action funded by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology. By systematically describing the various aspects of OH, we provide the basis for measuring and monitoring the integration of disciplines, sectors, and stakeholders in health initiatives. The framework identifies the social, economic, and environmental drivers leading to integrated approaches to health and illustrates how these evoke characteristic OH operations, i.e., thinking, planning, and working, and require supporting infrastructures to allow learning, sharing, and systemic organization. It also describes the OH outcomes (i.e., sustainability, health and welfare, interspecies equity and stewardship, effectiveness, and efficiency), which are not possible to obtain through sectoral approaches alone, and their alignment with aspects of sustainable development based on society, environment, and economy.

Epidemiological factors of tick-borne equine piroplasmoses, caused by Theileria equi and Babesia caballi, were investigated using logistic regression (GLM) and general additive models (GAM) based on the prevalences determined in 510 domestic horses and in ticks in S.W. Mongolia by indirect immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) and/or multiplex PCR. Prevalences of T. equi and B. caballi in horses were 66 . 5% (95 % CI : 62 . 1-70 . 7) and 19 . 1% (15 . 6-22 . 9), respectively by PCR and 78 . 8 % (74 . 9-82 . 3) and 65 . 7% (61 . 3-69 . 9) by IFAT. Of 166 ticks analysed from PCR-and IFAT-negative horses 1 was PCR positive for B. caballi and none for T. equi. GAM demonstrated non-linear increasing proportions of T. equi-PCR and -IFAT positive horses with age suggesting persistent infection. In contrast, the B. caballi-PCR prevalence decreased with age despite a concurrent increase in the proportion of IFAT-positive animals suggesting parasite elimination. The tick (Dermacentor nuttalli) burden of the horses increased with age and decreased with advancing season. Geldings were more likely to be infected with, and seroconvert to, T. equi. Neither herd affiliation, date of sample collection nor abundance of tick infestation had a significant influence on parasite prevalence.

The burden of human diseases in populations, or for an individual, is frequently estimated in terms of one of a number of Health Adjusted Life Years (HALYs). The Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) is a widely accepted HALY metric and is used by the World Health Organization and the Global Burden of Disease studies. Many human diseases are of animal origin and often cause ill health and production losses in domestic animals. The economic losses due to disease in animals are usually estimated in monetary terms. The monetary impact on animal health is not compatible with HALY approaches used to measure the impact on human health. To estimate the societal burden of zoonotic diseases that have substantial human and animal disease burden we propose methodology which can be accommodated within the DALY framework. Monetary losses due to the animal disease component of a zoonotic disease can be converted to an equivalent metric using a local gross national income per capita deflator. This essentially gives animal production losses a time trade-off for human life years. This is the time required to earn the income needed to replace that financial loss. This can then be assigned a DALY equivalent, termed animal loss equivalents (ALE), and added to the DALY associated with human ill health to give a modified DALY. This is referred to as the “zDALY”. ALEs could also be estimated using willingness-to-pay for animal health or survey tools to estimate the replacement time value for animals with high societal or emotional value (for example pets) that cannot be calculated directly using monetary worth. Thus the zDALY estimates the impact of a zoonotic disease to animal and human health. The losses due to the animal disease component of the modified DALY are straightforward to calculate. A number of worked examples such as echinococcosis, brucellosis, Q fever and cysticercosis from a diverse spectrum of countries with different levels of economic development illustrate the use of the zDALY indicator.

The One Health concept covers the interrelationship between human, animal and environmental health and requires multistakeholder collaboration across many cultural, disciplinary, institutional and sectoral boundaries. Yet, the implementation of the One Health approach appears hampered by shortcomings in the global framework for health governance. Knowledge integration approaches, at all stages of policy development, could help to address these shortcomings. The identification of key objectives, the resolving of trade-offs and the creation of a common vision and a common direction can be supported by multicriteria analyses. Evidence-based decision-making and transformation of observations into narratives detailing how situations emerge and might unfold in the future can be achieved by systems thinking. Finally, transdisciplinary approaches can be used both to improve the effectiveness of existing systems and to develop novel networks for collective action. To strengthen One Health governance, we propose that knowledge integration becomes a key feature of all stages in the development of related policies. We suggest several ways in which such integration could be promoted.