MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391997974 · doi:10.1017/one.2023.13.pr3

Review: Governance principles for AMR surveillance: A scoping review and conceptual framework — R0/PR3

2023· review· en· W4391997974 on OpenAlexaff
Arne Rückert, Fiona Harris, Cécile Aenishaenslin, Raphael Aguiar, Antoine Boudreau LeBlanc, Ronald Labonté, Irene Lambraki, E. Jane Parmley, Mary Wiktorowicz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRisk Perception and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Global Health ResearchUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of GuelphYork UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceConceptual frameworkPolitical scienceManagement scienceComputer scienceProcess managementBusinessSociologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a pressing global health issue with serious implications for health, food security, and livelihoods. Collective action, from local to global, that draws on the One Health (OH) approach to facilitate collaboration between the human, animal, and environmental sectors is required to inform initiatives to mitigate AMR. For AMR surveillance, this involves applying an intersectoral, multistakeholder perspective to guide the co-creation of knowledge and policy around the collection, analysis, and application of surveillance data to detect, monitor, and prevent AMR health threats. Currently, there is little available evidence on how to operationalize a OH approach to support integrated AMR surveillance systems, or on how the governance of such systems facilitates intersectoral action on AMR. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify the governance domains most relevant to applying the OH approach to the design and evaluation of AMR surveillance systems. We found that governance is a crucial component of the development of surveillance systems equipped to tackle complex, structural issues such as AMR. The governance domains identified include participation, coordination and collaboration, management, sustainability, accountability and transparency, and equity. These domains are relevant throughout all stages of policy design, implementation, and evaluation of AMR surveillance systems. Equity is both a domain and an essential component of the other domains. All the domains are interdependent and co-constitutive, so that progress in one domain can accelerate progress in another. The conceptual framework presented in this article can inform the design and evaluation of OH AMR governance systems and other complex health challenges that have similar barriers and facilitators to OH governance. The qualitative evaluation questions developed for each domain facilitate assessment of the breadth (the range of actors involved in governance) and depth (how meaningful their engagement is) for each domain relevant to OH governance. Finally, the prioritization of formal, sustainable, and democratic governance of AMR can help to facilitate achievement of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and promote conservation of the use of antimicrobials for future generations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.214
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk Perception and ManagementFrench-language works237,207