How studies on zoonotic risks in wildlife implement the one health approach - A systematic review

Abstract

Background: The recent COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence of infectious diseases at the human-animal interface highlight the global challenge of mitigating zoonotic risks. The One Health approach emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, urging for holistic and interdisciplinary strategies in disease prevention. Despite growing interest, the attention to wildlife in pandemic prevention remains limited. This systematic literature review aims to evaluate recent One Health research on zoonotic diseases and wildlife in terms of study design, interdisciplinary collaboration, and participatory approaches. Key questions addressed include the consideration of One Health domains, disciplinary involvement, and the inclusion of non-academic stakeholders.

Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed and Web of Science were searched for primary research papers on zoonotic diseases and wildlife from 2018 to 2023. Eligibility criteria included a focus on wildlife, zoonotic diseases, and adoption of the One Health approach.

Results: A total of 228 primary research papers were retrieved. Out of these, 105 studies were included in the review. Few studies integrated human, animal, and environmental domains simultaneously in data collection (4.8 %) and knowledge generation (29.5 %). While extensive knowledge was generated for animal health (97.1 %) and human health (84.8 %), environmental health (34.3 %) remained underrepresented. Laboratory methods predominated (82.9 %), with limited integration of social science methodologies (19 %). The majority were epidemiological studies (86.7 %), yet analytical design within these was sparse (17.1 %). Participation of non-academic stakeholders was limited (36.2 % included non-academics; 3.8 % encompassed participative approaches).

Conclusions: The synthesis of the domains human, animal and environmental health remained fragmentary in the studies reviewed. Environmental health is underrepresented and the interdisciplinary involvement of social sciences lacks. Neglecting these fields of competence impedes comprehensive understanding of disease dynamics and hampers effective zoonosis prevention strategies. In result, greater inter- and transdisciplinary collaboration, along with participatory approaches, are still needed for advancing One Health research.

Keywords: Interdisciplinary research; One health; Wild animals; Zoonoses.

Fig. 1

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram detailing number of records retrieved and selected for data extraction.

Fig. 2

Overlap of Human, Animal and Environmental Domains in A1) Data Collection and A2) Knowledge Generation of the studies, visualized in Euler-diagrams.

Fig. 3

Chord diagram illustrating interconnections between methodologies employed across various disciplines in our study. The colors represent the disciplines itself, the thickness of the chords represents the frequency of connections, offering insights into methodological interdisciplinarity and convergence. Clear spaces within a discipline indicate self-links. Medical examination was abbreviated as med. Exam.

Fig. 4

Network analysis of methodology applied in the studies: this arc diagram represents methods as nodes and their interconnections as arcs. The size of each node is proportional to the frequency of its application. Analogously to Fig. 3, the node colors represent the different disciplines: laboratory analysis (blue), medical examination (red), social methods (yellow), and environmental methods (green). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)