Co-production of knowledge as part of a OneHealth approach to better control zoonotic diseases.
Co-production of knowledge as part of a OneHealth approach to better control zoonotic diseases.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pgph.0000075
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
全球和各国日益注意到需要制定有效的战略来控制人畜共患疾病。然而，证据基础薄弱，公共卫生和动物卫生、野生生物和林业部门等不同规模的相关部门的利益攸关方之间协调有限，这些利益攸关方通常不会一起工作，这阻碍了迅速有效的行动。“一个健康”方法认识到以综合、全面和跨学科的方式对人类、动物和环境健康问题进行跨部门评估的价值，以减少疾病影响和/或减轻风险。知识的共同生产也被广泛提倡，以提高跨部门决策的质量和可接受性，在涉及人畜共患病时可能特别重要。本文汇集了OneHealth和知识共同生产，并通过描述一个过程来了解溢出，并确定印度南部人畜共患病（Kyasanur森林病）的疾病控制和缓解策略，反映了未来OneHealth共同生产过程的经验教训。联合生产过程的目的是开发一个联合决策支持工具与利益相关者，我们补充了我们的方法与一个简单的回顾性理论的变化研究人员的期望的系统级的结果的联合生产过程。我们的研究结果强调，虽然OneHealth中的联合生产是一个困难和资源密集型的过程，需要定期迭代调整和灵活性，但有益的结果证明了它的采用。未来的一个关键目标应该是改善和评估实现“一个健康”目标所需的部门间合作程度。最后，我们根据我们的经验提供指导方针，以帮助资助者和决策者支持未来的联合生产过程。
There is increased global and national attention on the need for effective strategies to control zoonotic diseases. Quick, effective action is, however, hampered by poor evidence-bases and limited coordination between stakeholders from relevant sectors such as public and animal health, wildlife and forestry sectors at different scales, who may not usually work together. The OneHealth approach recognises the value of cross-sectoral evaluation of human, animal and environmental health questions in an integrated, holistic and transdisciplinary manner to reduce disease impacts and/or mitigate risks. Co-production of knowledge is also widely advocated to improve the quality and acceptability of decision-making across sectors and may be particularly important when it comes to zoonoses. This paper brings together OneHealth and knowledge co-production and reflects on lessons learned for future OneHealth co-production processes by describing a process implemented to understand spill-over and identify disease control and mitigation strategies for a zoonotic disease in Southern India (Kyasanur Forest Disease). The co-production process aimed to develop a joint decision-support tool with stakeholders, and we complemented our approach with a simple retrospective theory of change on researcher expectations of the system-level outcomes of the co-production process. Our results highlight that while co-production in OneHealth is a difficult and resource intensive process, requiring regular iterative adjustments and flexibility, the beneficial outcomes justify its adoption. A key future aim should be to improve and evaluate the degree of inter-sectoral collaboration required to achieve the aims of OneHealth. We conclude by providing guidelines based on our experience to help funders and decision-makers support future co-production processes.