MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408855841 · doi:10.2196/55356

Data Parameters From Participatory Surveillance Systems in Human, Animal, and Environmental Health From Around the Globe: Descriptive Analysis

2025· article· en· W4408855841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carrie McNeil, Nomita Divi, Charles T. Bargeron, Andrea Capobianco Dondona, Kacey C. Ernst, Angela Gupta, Olukayode Fasominu, Lucy Keatts, T. Ross Kelly, Onício Leal Neto, May O. Lwin, Mvuyo Makhasi, Eric Beda Mutagahywa, Diego Montecino‐Latorre, Sarah H. Olson, Pranav Pandit, Daniela Paolotti, Matt Parker, Madar Samad, Kara Sewalk, Anita Sheldenkar, Lertrak Srikitjakarn, Channé Suy Lan, Michael S. Wilkes, Terdsak Yano, Mark S. Smolinski

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompendiumCitizen scienceCitizen journalismParticipatory GISPublic healthDescriptive statisticsData scienceHealth informaticsEnvironmental healthComputer scienceMedicineGeographyWorld Wide WebBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Emerging pathogens and zoonotic spillover highlight the need for One Health surveillance to detect outbreaks as early as possible. Participatory surveillance empowers communities to collect data at the source on the health of animals, people, and the environment. Technological advances increase the use and scope of these systems. This initiative sought to collate information from active participatory surveillance systems to better understand parameters collected across the One Health spectrum. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a compendium of One Health data parameters by examining participatory surveillance systems active in 2023. The expected outcomes of the compendium were to pinpoint specific parameters related to human, animal, and environmental health collected globally by participatory surveillance systems and to detail how each parameter is collected. The compendium was designed to help understand which parameters are currently collected and serve as a reference for future systems and for data standardization initiatives. METHODS: Contacts associated with the 60 systems identified through the One Health Participatory Surveillance System Map were invited by email to provide specific data parameters, methodologies used for data collection, and parameter-specific considerations. Information was received from 38 (63%) active systems. Data were compiled into a searchable spreadsheet-based compendium organized into 5 sections: general, livestock, wildlife, environmental, and human parameters. An advisory group comprising experts in One Health participatory surveillance reviewed the collected parameters, refined the compendium structure, and contributed to the descriptive analysis. RESULTS: A comprehensive compendium of data parameters from a diverse array of single-sector and multisector participatory surveillance systems was collated and reviewed. The compendium includes parameters from 38 systems used in Africa (n=3, 8%), Asia (n=9, 24%), Europe (n=12, 32%), Australia (n=3, 8%), and the Americas (n=12, 32%). Almost one-third of the systems (n=11, 29%) collect data across multiple sectors. Many (n=17, 45%) focus solely on human health. Variations in data collection techniques were observed for commonly used parameters, such as demographics and clinical signs or symptoms. Most human health systems collected parameters from a cohort of users tracking their own health over time, whereas many wildlife and environmental systems incorporated event-based parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Several participatory surveillance systems have already adopted a One Health approach, enhancing traditional surveillance by identifying shared health threats among animals, people, and the environment. The compendium reveals substantial variation in how parameters are collected, underscoring the need for further work in system interoperability and data standards to allow for timely data sharing across systems during outbreaks. Parameters collated from across the One Health spectrum represent a valuable resource for informing the development of future systems and identifying opportunities to expand existing systems for multisector surveillance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207