PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Nichola R. Naylor AU - Jo Lines AU - Jeff Waage AU - Barbara Wieland AU - Gwenan M. Knight TI - Quantitatively Evaluating the Cross-Sectoral and One Health Impact of Interventions: A Scoping Review and Application to Antibiotic Resistance AID - 10.1101/2020.01.30.20019703 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.01.30.20019703 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/02/03/2020.01.30.20019703.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/02/03/2020.01.30.20019703.full AB - Current published guidance on how to evaluate antibiotic resistance (ABR) from a One Health perspective has focussed on the evaluation of intervention design and of the intervention implementation process. For efficient resource allocation, it is also important to consider quantitative measures of intervention impact. In particular, there has been little discussion of how to practically evaluate ABR-related agri- and aquaculture interventions from a public health perspective. Lessons can be learned from other One Health and cross-sectoral intervention impact evaluations.WebofScience, EconLit, PubMed and grey literature were searched for literature quantitatively evaluating interventions across humans, animals and/or the environment. The review included 90 studies: 73 individual evaluations (from 72 papers) and 18 reviews, all including some measure of human impact, but only 29 papers covered all three One Health perspectives (human, animal and environmental). To provide decision makers with expected outcome estimates that are related to their objective functions, evaluations should provide outcome estimates from different perspectives. These include individual, microeconomic and/or macroeconomic perspectives across the One Health system. Based on the methods found in this review, a multi-level compartmental modelling approach for ABR-related intervention evaluation is proposed. The outcomes of such models can then feed into multi-criteria-decision analyses that weigh respective impact estimates alongside other chosen outcome estimates (for example equity or uncertainty). It is key that future quantitative evaluation models of ABR-related interventions are shared (for example through open source code sharing websites) to avoid duplication of effort and to enable more comprehensive estimates of intervention impact to be modelled in the future.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research was funded by, and is a contribution to, the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH). We thank all donors and organizations which globally support its work through their contributions to the CGIAR system. The opinions expressed here belong to the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of A4NH or CGIAR. Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data used in this study are in the form of literature data extraction. The data extraction table is available in the supplementary material of this paper.ABRAntibiotic ResistanceNEOHNetwork for Evaluation of One HealthOHOne Health