One Health capacity building in sub-Saharan Africa

Rwego, Innocent B.; Babalobi, Olutayo Olajide; Musotsi, Protus; Nzietchueng, Serge; Tiambo, Christian Keambo; Kabasa, John David; Naigaga, Irene; Kalema‐Zikusoka, Gladys; Pelican, Katherine

doi:10.3402/iee.v6.34032

Cited by 44 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adoption of One Health approaches is growing, driven in part by the inherent integration of diverse disciplines and in part through the emergence of financial and resource support for policy and program initiatives, educational programs, and research [17] , [18] , [19] , [20] . However, such growth may be constrained by the preferences of journal editors, boundaries on resources, lack of sustainable government commitment, and a paucity of international educational opportunities [5] , [17] , [18] , [20] , [21] , [22] . As One Health re-emerges as a top priority for those involved in the mitigation of diseases and promotion of wellness, it is important to recognize the challenges faced by those who work collaboratively to integrate the knowledge of multiple disciplines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE)

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One Health is defined as the intersection and integration of knowledge regarding humans, animals, and the environment, yet as the One Health scientific literature expands, there is considerable heterogeneity of approach and quality of reporting in One Health studies. In addition, many researchers who publish such studies do not include or integrate data from all three domains of human, animal, and environmental health. This points to a critical need to unify guidelines for One Health studies. This report details the Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE) to guide the design and publication format of future One Health studies. COHERE was developed by a core writing team and international expert review group that represents multiple disciplines, including human medicine, veterinary medicine, public health, allied professionals, clinical laboratory science, epidemiology, the social sciences, ecohealth and environmental health. The twin aims of the COHERE standards are to 1) improve the quality of reporting of observational or interventional epidemiological studies that collect and integrate data from humans, animals and/or vectors, and their environments; and 2) promote the concept that One Health studies should integrate knowledge from these three domains. The 19 standards in the COHERE checklist address descriptions of human populations, animal populations, environmental assessment, spatial and temporal relationships of data from the three domains, integration of analyses and interpretation, and inclusion of expertise in the research team from disciplines related to human health, animal health, and environmental health.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE)

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Kenya established a One Health office referred to as the Zoonotic disease unit and one of its mandates is to stimulate and conduct research and training at the human-animal-ecosystem interfaces [15]. Most of the countries involved in this review including Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda and Ethiopia have established similar One Health offices or have organizations and networks created to conduct One Health training, research and outreach [16]. Publication output of countries has been associated with the level of national research spending and English proficiency [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zoonotic disease research in East Africa

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe East African region is endemic with multiple zoonotic diseases and is one of the hotspots for emerging infectious zoonotic diseases with reported multiple outbreaks of epidemic diseases such as Ebola, Marburg and Rift Valley Fever. Here we present a systematic assessment of published research on zoonotic diseases in the region and thesis research in Kenya to understand the regional research focus and trends in publications, and estimate proportion of theses research transitioning to peer-reviewed journal publications.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Google Scholar and African Journals Online databases for publications on 36 zoonotic diseases identified to have occurred in the East Africa countries of Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Uganda, for the period between 1920 and 2017. We searched libraries and queried online repositories for masters and PhD theses on these diseases produced between 1970 and 2016 in five universities and two research institutions in Kenya.ResultsWe identified 771 journal articles on 22, and 168 theses on 21 of the 36 zoonotic diseases investigated. Research on zoonotic diseases increased exponentially with the last 10 years of our study period contributing more than half of all publications 460 (60%) and theses 102 (61%) retrieved. Endemic diseases were the most studied accounting for 656 (85%) and 150 (89%) of the publication and theses studies respectively, with publications on epidemic diseases associated with outbreaks reported in the region or elsewhere. Epidemiological studies were the most common study types but limited to cross-sectional studies while socio-economics were the least studied. Only 11% of the theses research transitioned to peer-review publications, taking an average of 2.5 years from theses production to manuscript publication.ConclusionOur findings demonstrate increased attention to zoonotic diseases in East Africa but reveal the need to expand the scope, focus and quality of studies to adequately address the public health, social and economic threats posed by zoonoses.

show abstract

“…One health concept is quite suitable and adaptable to SSA as it can facilitate cross-sectoral, crossdisciplinary engagement and produce outcomes at cheaper costs 26,27 . However, the funding for most (> 90%) of the One Health initiatives across Africa has originated largely from outside the continent with some partial co-funding from national governments.…”

Section: Developments In One Health Initiatives In Sub-saharan Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

One Health Landscape in Sub-Saharan African Countries

Fasina¹,

Fasanmi²,

Makonnen³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An evaluation of emerging issues in One Health (OH) in Sub-Saharan Africa was undertaken to map the existing OH initiatives in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries. Desk review, expert opinions survey, limited interviews and wider consultations with selected OH stakeholders were conducted. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to OH initiatives were identified. OH influence, interest and impacts were evaluated. One Health is transiting from multidisciplinary to transdisciplinary concepts and OH viewpoint should move from ‘proxy for zoonoses’, to include issues of climate change, nutrition and food safety, social sciences, geography, policy and planning, economics, welfare and well-being, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), vector-borne diseases, toxicosis and pesticides issues. While the identified major strengths should be boosted, the weaknesses should be addressed.OH Networks in SSA were spatially and temporally spread across SSA and stakeholders were classified as key, latent, marginal and OH defenders. Imbalance in stakeholders’ representation led to hesitation in buying-in from stakeholders who are outside the main networks. Theory of change, monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and tools to standardized evaluation of OH policies is needed for sustained future of OH and the future OH engagement should be outputs and outcomes-driven and not activity-driven.National roadmap for OH implementation and institutionalization is necessary and proofs of concepts in OH should be verified and scaled-up. Dependence on external funding is unsustainable and must be addressed. Necessary policy and legal instrument to support OH nationally and sub-nationally should be implemented taking cognizance of contemporary issues like urbanization, endemic poverty and other emerging issues. Utilizing current technologies and OH approach to address ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 and other emerging diseases is desirable. Finally, OH implementation should be anticipatory and not reactive to significantly benefit budgeting and contain disease outbreaks in animal sources before the risk of spillover to human can be envisaged.

show abstract

One Health capacity building in sub-Saharan Africa

Cited by 44 publications

References 13 publications

Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE)

Checklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence (COHERE)

Zoonotic disease research in East Africa

One Health Landscape in Sub-Saharan African Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About