Loading
Animal Disease Management and Epidemiology / Zoonotic Diseases and Public Health · Journal article
Frontiers in Public Health · August 17, 2026
Early or partial results. Treat as a signal, not a conclusion.
This is a descriptive curriculum mapping study of India's Field Epidemiology Programme in One Health (FEP OH) against the COHFE framework. It documents that 61.3% of competencies have at least some coverage, with strong alignment in core multisectoral and technical domains but critical gaps in functional domains (ethics 17.1%, training 20.0%) and sector-specific competencies (environment 25.0%). The findings provide a baseline assessment and methodological template for curriculum enhancement but do not measure actual competency attainment or impact on field epidemiology practice.
Systematic curriculum mapping study with expert review and consensus validation. Field Epidemiology Programme in One Health (FEP OH) curriculum materials; review conducted by program faculty and technical experts.. Intervention: Field Epidemiology Programme in One Health (FEP OH), a three-month frontline training program. Compared with: COHFE (Competencies for One Health Field Epidemiology) framework—global standards for One Health field epidemiology training. India (National Centre for Disease Control and Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying).
Overall 61.3% of 448 COHFE frontline competencies had at least some coverage (35.0% covered, 26.3% partially covered) COHFE One Health Core competencies showed strong alignment at 82.8% coverage Technical domains with strong alignment: data management and biostatistics 95.5%, field investigations 86.5%, surveillance systems 83.3%, epidemiologic studies 78.8%
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
This study provides evidence-based documentation of curriculum gaps in a national One Health training program, particularly in ethics, training delivery, and sector-specific competencies. Program administrators and curriculum designers should use these findings to prioritize enhancement of functional domains and cross-sectoral competencies, though the mapping alone does not demonstrate whether students attain improved competencies or whether curriculum changes improve field epidemiology practice.
A systematic curriculum mapping study without experimental outcomes or intervention comparison; provides descriptive analysis of training program alignment against a framework to identify gaps and inform future enhancement.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
This study provides evidence-based documentation of curriculum gaps in a national One Health training program, particularly in ethics, training delivery, and sector-specific competencies. Program administrators and curriculum designers should use these findings to prioritize enhancement of functional domains and cross-sectoral competencies, though the mapping alone does not demonstrate whether students attain improved competencies or whether curriculum changes improve field epidemiology practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Background The Competencies for One Health Field Epidemiology (COHFE) framework provides global standards for One Health field epidemiology training. India’s National Centre for Disease Control in collaboration with the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying developed the Field Epidemiology Programme in One Health (FEP OH), a three-month frontline training program. This study systematically assessed its curriculum alignment with the COHFE framework competencies to identify strengths and gaps. Methods All 448 COHFE frontline competencies across 14 domains were systematically mapped against the FEP OH curriculum materials. Coverage was classified as covered, partially covered, or not covered through expert review and consensus validation involving program faculty and technical experts. Descriptive analyses examined coverage patterns by domain, sector-core category, and competency type. Results Overall, 61.3% of competencies had at least some coverage (35.0% covered, 26.3% partially covered). COHFE One Health Core competencies showed strong alignment (82.8% coverage). Technical domains demonstrated variable coverage: data management and biostatistics (95.5%), field investigations (86.5%), surveillance systems (83.3%), and epidemiologic studies (78.8%) showed strong alignment, while ecosystem health (45.2%) and disease management (42.2%) had coverage gaps. Functional domains revealed marked disparities: communication (88.2%) had better coverage than training (20.0%) and ethics (17.1%). Sector-specific competencies showed lower alignment: public health (38.9%), animal health (35.7%), and environment (25.0%) than One Health competencies. Conclusion This first global assessment of frontline One Health field epidemiology training against the COHFE framework demonstrates strong curriculum alignment of core multisectoral competencies but identifies critical coverage gaps in functional domains and sector-specific competencies. Findings provide an evidence-based roadmap for curriculum enhancement and offer a replicable methodology for other programs seeking to inform curriculum enhancement to support One Health workforce capacity.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.