One health outlook · 2026
Understanding zoonotic spillover interfaces for the design of a One Health education intervention: a qualitative baseline study from rural Thailand.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bärnighausen Kate, Phongsiri Monchai, Lilier Kyra, Tomklang Simaphon, Labooth Theerayuth, Chaibut Thanapat, Jaruton Pongsakon, Chanprathad Kotthamon, Suphawatthanaphan Sarutaya, Overgaard Hans, Reñosa Mark Donald C, Sornillo Bianca Joyce, Wachinger Jonas, Amin Hussein, Shelil Mohamed, Pompeu Cassia Rocha, Kachnova Uliana, Montag Doreen, Sasitharan Vidhya, Bärnighausen Till, Treskova Marina, Lapanun Patcharin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Prevention of zoonotic spillover requires an understanding of how human, animal, and environmental interactions shape risk in everyday life. Efforts have focused largely on surveillance and response rather than on primary prevention informed by lived experience. In Southeast Asia-a recognised hotspot for zoonotic emergence-there is limited qualitative evidence describing how spillover risk is shaped by routine practices, environmental change, and structural constraints, and how such evidence can inform the design of One Health education interventions.
METHODS: We conducted a formative qualitative study in Nan Province, northern Thailand, employing shared walks, in-depth interviews, community mapping, and participant and non-participant observation. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and organised using a qualitative One Health Risk Interface Framework encompassing human-animal, human-environment, human-human, animal-animal and animal-environment interfaces.
RESULTS: Spillover risk and mitigation was produced and experienced through routine food preparation, hunting, farming, and caregiving practices. The human-animal interface includes frequent handling of wildlife and domestic animals, mixed-species environments, and informal meat processing. The human-environment interface is characterised by water scarcity, contamination, deforestation, landslides, and inadequate waste management. The human-human interface describes information and communication issues and how these problems can be addressed. The animal-animal and animal-environment interfaces reflect shifting ecologies driven by land-use change, secondary forests, and agricultural intensification, bringing wildlife, livestock, and people into closer proximity.
CONCLUSION: Zoonotic spillover risk in rural Thailand is produced through interconnected behavioural, ecological, and structural processes that cannot be addressed through individual behaviour change alone. An education intervention will need to develop both knowledge and skills within a broader framework of conservation and acknowledgment of structural resource constraints.
METHODS: We conducted a formative qualitative study in Nan Province, northern Thailand, employing shared walks, in-depth interviews, community mapping, and participant and non-participant observation. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and organised using a qualitative One Health Risk Interface Framework encompassing human-animal, human-environment, human-human, animal-animal and animal-environment interfaces.
RESULTS: Spillover risk and mitigation was produced and experienced through routine food preparation, hunting, farming, and caregiving practices. The human-animal interface includes frequent handling of wildlife and domestic animals, mixed-species environments, and informal meat processing. The human-environment interface is characterised by water scarcity, contamination, deforestation, landslides, and inadequate waste management. The human-human interface describes information and communication issues and how these problems can be addressed. The animal-animal and animal-environment interfaces reflect shifting ecologies driven by land-use change, secondary forests, and agricultural intensification, bringing wildlife, livestock, and people into closer proximity.
CONCLUSION: Zoonotic spillover risk in rural Thailand is produced through interconnected behavioural, ecological, and structural processes that cannot be addressed through individual behaviour change alone. An education intervention will need to develop both knowledge and skills within a broader framework of conservation and acknowledgment of structural resource constraints.