Using a fuzzy cognitive map to assess interventions to reduce antimicrobial resistance in a Swedish One Health system context under potential climate change conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing One Health crisis that can be impacted by other challenges of sustainable development, such as climate change, but few interventions have been assessed with a systems-wide lens. The objectives of this study were to use a previously defined fuzzy cognitive map (FCM) of the Swedish One Health system to: 1) identify areas in the system to target interventions; and 2) test the potential ability and viability of interventions to reduce AMR under a changing climate. Methods: The FCM, based on participatory modelling workshops and literature scan, was used to assess the sustainability of eight interventions under potential climate change conditions. Network metrics were calculated to describe the system structure and identify highly impactful nodes. Results: The network metrics identified high-leverage nodes including alternative productions systems and good farming practices. None of the scenarios evaluated were able to adequately reduce AMR within the system. Conclusions: Overall, fuzzy cognitive mapping provides an innovative way to analyse the AMR system, identify high-leverage interventions, and examine potential impact of interventions using a broader systems lens.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".