Amenu Kebede, McIntyre K Marie, Moje Nebyou, Knight-Jones Theodore, Rushton Jonathan, Grace Delia
Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) Programme, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Veterinary, Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture, Addis Ababa University, Bishoftu, Ethiopia.
Front Vet Sci. 2023 Oct 6;10:1231711. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1231711. eCollection 2023.
This scoping review identifies and describes the methods used to prioritize diseases for resource allocation across disease control, surveillance, and research and the methods used generally in decision-making on animal health policy. Three electronic databases (Medline/PubMed, Embase, and CAB Abstracts) were searched for articles from 2000 to 2021. Searches identified 6, 395 articles after de-duplication, with an additional 64 articles added manually. A total of 6, 460 articles were imported to online document review management software (sysrev.com) for screening. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 532 articles passed the first screening, and after a second round of screening, 336 articles were recommended for full review. A total of 40 articles were removed after data extraction. Another 11 articles were added, having been obtained from cross-citations of already identified articles, providing a total of 307 articles to be considered in the scoping review. The results show that the main methods used for disease prioritization were based on economic analysis, multi-criteria evaluation, risk assessment, simple ranking, spatial risk mapping, and simulation modeling. Disease prioritization was performed to aid in decision-making related to various categories: (1) disease control, prevention, or eradication strategies, (2) general organizational strategy, (3) identification of high-risk areas or populations, (4) assessment of risk of disease introduction or occurrence, (5) disease surveillance, and (6) research priority setting. Of the articles included in data extraction, 50.5% had a national focus, 12.3% were local, 11.9% were regional, 6.5% were sub-national, and 3.9% were global. In 15.2% of the articles, the geographic focus was not specified. The scoping review revealed the lack of comprehensive, integrated, and mutually compatible approaches to disease prioritization and decision support tools for animal health. We recommend that future studies should focus on creating comprehensive and harmonized frameworks describing methods for disease prioritization and decision-making tools in animal health.
本范围综述确定并描述了用于在疾病控制、监测和研究中对疾病进行资源分配优先级排序的方法,以及动物卫生政策决策中普遍使用的方法。检索了三个电子数据库(Medline/PubMed、Embase和CAB Abstracts),以查找2000年至2021年的文章。去重后检索到6395篇文章,另外手动添加了64篇文章。总共6460篇文章被导入在线文档评审管理软件(sysrev.com)进行筛选。根据纳入和排除标准,532篇文章通过了首轮筛选,第二轮筛选后,336篇文章被推荐进行全面评审。数据提取后共排除40篇文章。又从已识别文章的交叉引用中添加了11篇文章,使得范围综述中总共要考虑307篇文章。结果表明,用于疾病优先级排序的主要方法基于经济分析、多标准评估、风险评估、简单排序、空间风险映射和模拟建模。进行疾病优先级排序是为了辅助与以下各类相关的决策:(1)疾病控制、预防或根除策略,(2)总体组织策略,(3)确定高风险地区或人群,(4)评估疾病引入或发生的风险,(5)疾病监测,以及(6)研究优先级设定。在数据提取纳入的文章中,50.5%以国家为重点,12.3%是地方层面的,11.9%是区域层面的,6.5%是次国家层面的,3.9%是全球层面的。15.2%的文章未明确地理重点。范围综述揭示了在疾病优先级排序和动物卫生决策支持工具方面缺乏全面、综合且相互兼容的方法。我们建议未来的研究应侧重于创建全面且统一的框架,描述动物卫生中疾病优先级排序方法和决策工具。