Progress and challenges in development of minimum essential dataset for disease surveillance through a One Health lens: a scoping review

Clinical Snapshot

Key Findings

• P Value: Not applicable for scoping review

• Effect Size: 89.3% of studies focused on human health interface, ≤10.7% on animal/environmental interfaces

• Primary Outcome: Critical gaps identified in MED development at human-animal-environment interface

• Nnt Or Sensitivity: 57.1% of studies showed insufficient interdisciplinary collaboration despite One Health adoption

• Confidence Interval: Not applicable for scoping review

Clinical Application

High feasibility with proposed operational pathway and tools, though requires cross-sectoral coordination Highly relevant to Australian Department of Health, Department of Agriculture, and state health departments for integrated surveillance systems. Aligns with Australia's One Health approach to biosecurity and pandemic preparedness Public health agencies, veterinary services, environmental health departments developing surveillance systems

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Minimum essential dataset (MED) enables One Health surveillance by facilitating cross-sectoral data sharing. Yet, existing MED research represents insufficient integration of the One Health concept, and its progress in disease surveillance remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate the current progress and gaps in MED research in disease surveillance through a One Health lens. METHODS: This scoping review systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from the inception of databases to November 30th, 2024 to identify studies published in English. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers for inclusion based on their relevance to the development of MEDs for disease surveillance. The progress and challenges were synthesized based on data extracted from eligible studies. RESULTS: This review includes 28 eligible studies for analysis, all of which focused on infectious diseases. MED development is predominantly concentrated on the human health interface (89.3%), whereas animal and environmental interfaces are comparatively limited (≤ 10.7%). The One Health concept has been adopted in 16 of the eligible studies; however, there is still insufficient interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration (57.1%). Meanwhile, numerous methods have been employed in the development of MEDs, with qualitative approaches being the most prevalent (42.9%), while data-driven approaches remain scarce. The absence of a standardized approach is recognized as a primary barrier. Thus, we propose a pathway and operational tool to detail the specific steps, which could facilitate future research on MED. CONCLUSION: This review highlights critical gaps in MED development at the human-animal-environment interface, and proposes a pathway and operational tool to inform future development of MED, including scope identification, establishment, modification and improvement. This study promotes the improvement of disease surveillance system and provides insights to enhance future preparedness for reducing the global public health burden.

References

1. 1.Li, T., Jia, L., Qiang, N., Zheng, J., Ran, J., Zhang, X., & Han, L. (2026). Progress and challenges in development of minimum essential dataset for disease surveillance through a One Health lens: a scoping review. Infectious Diseases of Poverty. https://doi.org/10.59717/j.xinn-med.2024.100091