动物保健决策支持工具的优先排序、资源分配和使用:专家定性访谈结果

IF 2.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES Preventive veterinary medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106333
Kebede Amenu , Chris Daborn , Benjamin Huntington , Theodore Knight-Jones , Jonathan Rushton , Delia Grace
{"title":"动物保健决策支持工具的优先排序、资源分配和使用:专家定性访谈结果","authors":"Kebede Amenu ,&nbsp;Chris Daborn ,&nbsp;Benjamin Huntington ,&nbsp;Theodore Knight-Jones ,&nbsp;Jonathan Rushton ,&nbsp;Delia Grace","doi":"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A follow up to an online questionnaire survey (in a kind of a sequential study design), qualitative assessment was made on the views of selected animal health experts on disease prioritization methods, resource allocation and use of decision-support tools. This was done through in-depth interviews with experts working for national or international organizations and sectors. A semi-structured question guide was formulated based on the information generated in the online questionnaire and a systematic content analysis of animal and human health manuals for disease prioritization and resource allocation. In-depth, one-on-one, online interviews on the process of disease prioritization, animal health decision-making, types of prioritization tools and aspects of improvements in the tools were conducted during March and April 2022 with 20 expert informants. Prioritization approaches reported by experts were either single criterion-based or multiple criteria-based. Experts appreciated the single-criterion-based approach (quantitative) for its objectivity in contrast to multicriteria prioritization approaches which were criticized for their subjectivity. Interviews with the experts revealed a perceived lack of quality and reliable data to inform disease prioritization, especially in smallholder livestock production systems. It was found that outputs of disease prioritization exercises do not generally directly influence resource allocation in animal health and highlighted the paucity of funding for animal health compared to other agricultural sectors. The experts considered that the available decision-support tools in animal health need improvement in terms of data visualization for interpretation, management decision making and advocacy. Further recommendations include minimizing subjective biases by increasing the availability and quality of data and improving the translation of disease prioritization outputs into actions and the resources to deliver those actions.</p></div><div><h3>Data Availability Statement</h3><p>The data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20413,"journal":{"name":"Preventive veterinary medicine","volume":"233 ","pages":"Article 106333"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prioritization, resource allocation and utilization of decision support tools in animal health: Results of qualitative interviews with experts\",\"authors\":\"Kebede Amenu ,&nbsp;Chris Daborn ,&nbsp;Benjamin Huntington ,&nbsp;Theodore Knight-Jones ,&nbsp;Jonathan Rushton ,&nbsp;Delia Grace\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prevetmed.2024.106333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A follow up to an online questionnaire survey (in a kind of a sequential study design), qualitative assessment was made on the views of selected animal health experts on disease prioritization methods, resource allocation and use of decision-support tools. This was done through in-depth interviews with experts working for national or international organizations and sectors. A semi-structured question guide was formulated based on the information generated in the online questionnaire and a systematic content analysis of animal and human health manuals for disease prioritization and resource allocation. In-depth, one-on-one, online interviews on the process of disease prioritization, animal health decision-making, types of prioritization tools and aspects of improvements in the tools were conducted during March and April 2022 with 20 expert informants. Prioritization approaches reported by experts were either single criterion-based or multiple criteria-based. Experts appreciated the single-criterion-based approach (quantitative) for its objectivity in contrast to multicriteria prioritization approaches which were criticized for their subjectivity. Interviews with the experts revealed a perceived lack of quality and reliable data to inform disease prioritization, especially in smallholder livestock production systems. It was found that outputs of disease prioritization exercises do not generally directly influence resource allocation in animal health and highlighted the paucity of funding for animal health compared to other agricultural sectors. The experts considered that the available decision-support tools in animal health need improvement in terms of data visualization for interpretation, management decision making and advocacy. Further recommendations include minimizing subjective biases by increasing the availability and quality of data and improving the translation of disease prioritization outputs into actions and the resources to deliver those actions.</p></div><div><h3>Data Availability Statement</h3><p>The data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20413,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Preventive veterinary medicine\",\"volume\":\"233 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106333\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Preventive veterinary medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587724002198\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Preventive veterinary medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587724002198","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为在线问卷调查的后续行动(一种顺序研究设计),对选定的动物健康专家关于疾病优先排序方法、资源分配和决策支持工具使用的观点进行了定性评估。这项工作是通过与国家或国际组织和部门的专家进行深入访谈完成的。根据在线调查问卷生成的信息以及对动物和人类健康手册中有关疾病优先排序和资源分配的系统内容分析,制定了半结构化问题指南。2022 年 3 月和 4 月期间,对 20 位专家信息提供者进行了一对一的深入在线访谈,内容涉及疾病优先排序过程、动物健康决策、优先排序工具的类型以及工具改进的各个方面。专家们报告的优先排序方法有基于单一标准的,也有基于多重标准的。专家们赞赏基于单一标准的方法(定量)的客观性,而多标准优先排序方法则因其主观性而受到批评。与专家的访谈显示,他们认为缺乏高质量和可靠的数据为疾病优先排序提供信息,特别是在小农畜牧生产系统中。访谈发现,疾病优先排序工作的成果一般不会直接影响动物健康领域的资源分配,并强调与其他农业部门相比,动物健康领域的资金匮乏。专家们认为,动物健康领域现有的决策支持工具需要在数据可视化解释、管理决策和宣传方面加以改进。进一步的建议包括:通过提高数据的可用性和质量,最大限度地减少主观偏见;更好地将疾病优先排序结果转化为行动和实施这些行动的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Prioritization, resource allocation and utilization of decision support tools in animal health: Results of qualitative interviews with experts

A follow up to an online questionnaire survey (in a kind of a sequential study design), qualitative assessment was made on the views of selected animal health experts on disease prioritization methods, resource allocation and use of decision-support tools. This was done through in-depth interviews with experts working for national or international organizations and sectors. A semi-structured question guide was formulated based on the information generated in the online questionnaire and a systematic content analysis of animal and human health manuals for disease prioritization and resource allocation. In-depth, one-on-one, online interviews on the process of disease prioritization, animal health decision-making, types of prioritization tools and aspects of improvements in the tools were conducted during March and April 2022 with 20 expert informants. Prioritization approaches reported by experts were either single criterion-based or multiple criteria-based. Experts appreciated the single-criterion-based approach (quantitative) for its objectivity in contrast to multicriteria prioritization approaches which were criticized for their subjectivity. Interviews with the experts revealed a perceived lack of quality and reliable data to inform disease prioritization, especially in smallholder livestock production systems. It was found that outputs of disease prioritization exercises do not generally directly influence resource allocation in animal health and highlighted the paucity of funding for animal health compared to other agricultural sectors. The experts considered that the available decision-support tools in animal health need improvement in terms of data visualization for interpretation, management decision making and advocacy. Further recommendations include minimizing subjective biases by increasing the availability and quality of data and improving the translation of disease prioritization outputs into actions and the resources to deliver those actions.

Data Availability Statement

The data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Preventive veterinary medicine
Preventive veterinary medicine 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
184
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Preventive Veterinary Medicine is one of the leading international resources for scientific reports on animal health programs and preventive veterinary medicine. The journal follows the guidelines for standardizing and strengthening the reporting of biomedical research which are available from the CONSORT, MOOSE, PRISMA, REFLECT, STARD, and STROBE statements. The journal focuses on: Epidemiology of health events relevant to domestic and wild animals; Economic impacts of epidemic and endemic animal and zoonotic diseases; Latest methods and approaches in veterinary epidemiology; Disease and infection control or eradication measures; The "One Health" concept and the relationships between veterinary medicine, human health, animal-production systems, and the environment; Development of new techniques in surveillance systems and diagnosis; Evaluation and control of diseases in animal populations.
期刊最新文献
The global prevalence of microsporidia infection in rabbits as a neglected public health concern: A systematic review and meta-analysis Operational lessons learned from simulating an elimination response to a transboundary animal disease in wild animals. Economic assessment of animal disease burden in Senegalese small ruminants Editorial Board Causes of abortion in Iranian goat herds and associated risk factors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1