Dataset Information

Research priorities for control of zoonoses in South Africa.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Zoonoses pose major threats to the health of humans, domestic animals and wildlife, as seen in the COVID-19 pandemic. Zoonoses are the commonest source of emerging human infections and inter-species transmission is facilitated by anthropogenic factors such as encroachment and destruction of wilderness areas, wildlife trafficking and climate change. South Africa was selected for a 'One Health' study to identify research priorities for control of zoonoses due to its complex disease burden and an overstretched health system.

Methods

A multidisciplinary group of 18 experts identified priority zoonotic diseases, knowledge gaps and proposed research priorities for the next 5 y. Each priority was scored using predefined criteria by another group of five experts and then weighted by a reference group (n=28) and the 18 experts.

Results

Seventeen diseases were mentioned with the top five being rabies (14/18), TB (13/18), brucellosis (11/18), Rift Valley fever (9/11) and cysticercosis (6/18). In total, 97 specific research priorities were listed, with the majority on basic epidemiological research (n=57), such as measuring the burden of various zoonoses (n=24), followed by 20 on development of new interventions. The highest research priority score was for improving existing interventions (0.77/1.0), followed by health policy and systems research (0.72/1.0).

Conclusion

Future zoonotic research should improve understanding of zoonotic burden and risk factors and new interventions in public health. People with limited rural services, immunocompromised, in informal settlements and high-risk occupations, should be the highest research priority.

SUBMITTER: Simpson G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8083559 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:'Universal' access to antiretroviral treatment (ART) has become the global standard for treating people living with HIV and achieving epidemic control; yet, findings from numerous 'test and treat' trials and implementation studies in sub-Saharan Africa suggest that bringing 'universal' access to ART to scale is more complex than anticipated. Using South Africa as a case example, we describe the research priorities and foci in the literature on expanded ART access. To do so, we adapted Arksey and O'Malley's six-stage scoping review framework to describe the peer-reviewed literature and opinion pieces on expanding access to ART in South Africa between 2000 and 2017. Data collection included systematic searches of two databases and hand-searching of a sub-sample of reference lists. We used an adapted socio-ecological thematic framework to categorize data according to where it located the challenges and opportunities of expanded ART eligibility: individual/client, health worker-client relationship, clinic/community context, health systems infrastructure and/or policy context. We included 194 research articles and 23 opinion pieces, of 1512 identified, addressing expanded ART access in South Africa. The peer-reviewed literature focused on the individual and health systems infrastructure; opinion pieces focused on changing roles of individuals, communities and health services implementers. We contextualized our findings through a consultative process with a group of researchers, HIV clinicians and programme managers to consider critical knowledge gaps. Unlike the published literature, the consultative process offered particular insights into the importance of researching and intervening in the relational aspects of HIV service delivery as South Africa's HIV programme expands. An overwhelming focus on individual and health systems infrastructure factors in the published literature on expanded ART access in South Africa may skew understanding of HIV programme shortfalls away from the relational aspects of HIV services delivery and delay progress with finding ways to leverage non-medical modalities for achieving HIV epidemic control.

Project description:BackgroundMortality rates among surgical patients in Africa are double those of surgical patients in high-income countries. Internationally, there is a call to improve access to and safety of surgical and perioperative care. Perioperative research needs to be coordinated across Africa to positively impact perioperative mortality.MethodsThe aim of this study was to determine the top 10 perioperative research priorities for perioperative nurses in Africa, using a research priority-setting process. A Delphi technique with 4 rounds was used to establish consensus on the top 10 perioperative research priorities. In the first round, respondents submitted research priorities. Similar research priorities were amalgamated into single priorities when possible. In round 2, respondents ranked the priorities using a scale from 1 to 10 (of which 1 is the first/highest priority, and 10 is the last/lowest priority). The top 20 (of 31) were determined after round 2. In round 3, respondents ranked their top 10 priorities. The final round was an online discussion to reach consensus on the top 10 perioperative research priorities.ResultsA total of 17 perioperative nurses representing 12 African countries determined the top research priorities, which were: (1) strategies to translate and implement perioperative research into clinical practice in Africa, (2) creating a perioperative research culture and the tools, resources, and funding needed to conduct perioperative nursing research in Africa, (3) optimizing nurse-led postoperative pain management, (4) survey of operating theater and critical care resources, (5) perception of, and adherence to sterile field and aseptic techniques among surgeons in Africa (6) surgical staff burnout, (7) broad principles of infection control in surgical wards, (8) the role of interprofessional communication to promote clinical teamwork when caring for surgical patients, (9) effective implementation of the surgical safety checklist and measures of its impact, and (10) constituents of quality nursing care.ConclusionsThese research priorities provide the structure for an intermediate-term research agenda for perioperative research in Africa.

Project description:BackgroundOne Health is particularly relevant to the Horn of Africa where many people's livelihoods are highly dependent on livestock and their shared environment. In this context, zoonoses may have a dramatic impact on both human and animal health, but also on country economies. This scoping review aimed to characterise and evaluate the nature of zoonotic disease research in the Horn region. Specifically, it addressed the following questions: (i) what specific zoonotic diseases have been prioritised for research, (ii) what data have been reported (human, animal or environment), (iii) what methods have been applied, and (iv) who has been doing the research?Methodology/principal findingsWe used keyword combinations to search online databases for peer-reviewed papers and theses. Screening and data extraction (disease, country, domain and method) was performed using DistillerSR. A total of 2055 studies focusing on seven countries and over 60 zoonoses were included. Brucellosis attracted the highest attention in terms of research while anthrax, Q fever and leptospirosis have been comparatively under-studied. Research efforts did not always align with zoonoses priorities identified at national levels. Despite zoonoses being a clear target for 'One Health' research, a very limited proportion of studies report data on the three domains of human, animal and environment. Descriptive and observational epidemiological studies were dominant and only a low proportion of publications were multidisciplinary. Finally, we found that a minority of international collaborations were between Global South countries with a high proportion of authors having affiliations from outside the Horn of Africa.Conclusions/significanceThere is a growing interest in zoonoses research in the Horn of Africa. Recommendations arising from this scoping review include: (i) ensuring zoonoses research aligns with national and global research agendas; (ii) encouraging researchers to adopt a holistic, transdisciplinary One Health approach following high quality reporting standards (COHERE, PRISMA, etc.); and (iii) empowering local researchers supported by regional and international partnerships to engage in zoonoses research.

Project description:Background: Emerging data from Africa indicates remarkably low numbers of reported COVID-19 deaths despite high levels of disease transmission. However, evolution of these trends as the pandemic progresses remains unknown. More certain are the devastating long-term impacts of the pandemic on health and development evident globally. Research tailored to the unique needs of African countries is crucial. UKCDR and GloPID-R have launched a tracker of funded COVID-19 projects mapped to the WHO research priorities and research priorities of Africa and less-resourced countries and published a baseline analysis of a living systematic review (LSR) of these projects. Methods: In-depth analyses of the baseline LSR for COVID-19 funded research projects in Africa (as of 15th July 2020) to determine the funding landscape and alignment of the projects to research priorities of relevance to Africa. Results: The limited COVID-19 related research across Africa appears to be supported mainly by international funding, especially from Europe, although with notably limited funding from United States-based funders. At the time of this analysis no research projects funded by an African-based funder were identified in the tracker although there are several active funding calls geared at research in Africa and there may be funding data that has not been made publicly available. Many projects mapped to the WHO research priorities and five particular gaps in research funding were identified, namely: investigating the role of children in COVID-19 transmission; effective modes of community engagement; health systems research; communication of uncertainties surrounding mother-to-child transmission of COVID-19; and identifying ways to promote international cooperation. Capacity strengthening was identified as a dominant theme in funded research project plans. Conclusions: We found significantly lower funding investments in COVID-19 research in Africa compared to high-income countries, seven months into the pandemic, indicating a paucity of research targeting the research priorities of relevance to Africa.

Project description:BackgroundIn order to reignite gains and accelerate progress toward improved malaria control and elimination, policy, strategy, and operational decisions should be derived from high-quality evidence. The U.S. President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) Insights project together with the Université Cheikh Anta Diop of Dakar, Senegal, conducted a broad stakeholder consultation process to identify pressing evidence gaps in malaria control and elimination across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), and developed a priority list of country-driven malaria operational research (OR) and programme evaluation (PE) topics to address these gaps.MethodsFive key stakeholder groups were engaged in the process: national malaria programmes (NMPs), research institutions in SSA, World Health Organization (WHO) representatives in SSA, international funding agencies, and global technical partners who support malaria programme implementation and research. Stakeholders were engaged through individual or small group interviews and an online survey, and asked about key operational challenges faced by NMPs, pressing evidence gaps in current strategy and implementation guidance, and priority OR and PE questions to address the challenges and gaps.ResultsAltogether, 47 interviews were conducted with 82 individuals, and through the online survey, input was provided by 46 global technical partners. A total of 33 emergent OR and PE topics were identified through the consultation process and were subsequently evaluated and prioritized by an external evaluation committee of experts from NMPs, research institutions, and the WHO. The resulting prioritized OR and PE topics predominantly focused on generating evidence needed to close gaps in intervention coverage, address persistent challenges faced by NMPs in the implementation of core strategic interventions, and inform the effective deployment of new tools.ConclusionThe prioritized research list is intended to serve as a key resource for informing OR and PE investments, thereby ensuring future investments focus on generating the evidence needed to strengthen national strategies and programme implementation and facilitating a more coordinated and impactful approach to malaria operational research.