DATA DISTRIBUTION AMONG PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALISTS ON ZOONOTIC DISEASES IN PLATEAU STATE, NIGERIA

  • : Ms Word Format
  • : 70 Pages
  • : ₦3000
  • : 1-5 Chapters
  •  
  • Click to DOWNLOAD Materials

DATA DISTRIBUTION AMONG PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALISTS ON ZOONOTIC DISEASES IN PLATEAU STATE, NIGERIA  

ABSTRACT

This study explores knowledge sharing among public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State. To achieve the objective of this study five research questions were raised to include: What is the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases? What is the absorptive capacity of health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases? What factors motivate public health professionals to share knowledge in managing zoonotic diseases? What factors limit knowledge sharing of public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases? How do the constructs of social exchange theory explain the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic disease? Social Exchange Theory provided the theoretical framework for the study. A qualitative method using a case study research design was used for the study. Data were collected through a semi- structured interview and focus group discussion. Purposive sampling technique was used to select participants for the study. Thirty-nine recorded voices were used for analysis. The analysis was done using qualitative content analysis. Findings revealed positive perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases as follows; Effective management of zoonotic diseases, Knowledge gap exist, Conform to the notion of “One Health Initiative”, Save humans lives. Also, the study found that; Public health professionals acquire external knowledge in managing zoonotic disease through multidisciplinary networks and Professional associations; Attending Seminars, Workshops, Symposia and Conferences; Consulting books, journals, and internet databases and During work routines and processes. Findings of the study also indicated that the two construct of social exchange theory reciprocity and trust explain the perception of health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic disease. It is therefore, recommended that Stakeholders should take advantage of the positive perception of public health professionals and strengthens the capacities in the human and animal health sectors and create the mechanism necessary to effectively share knowledge among public health professionals in order to detect and respond to emerging health threats of zoonotic diseases.

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

     1.1       Background to the Study 

Zoonotic diseases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality (World Health Organisation [WHO], 2003; Tekki, Nwosu, and Okewole, 2013). Zoonotic diseases have caused the death of over 14 million people annually of global population (WHO, 2000). Zoonotic diseases are transmitted from wild and domestic animals and from their products to humans. Examples of zoonotic diseases are ebola, rabies, lassa fever, swine flu, avian influenza, tuberculosis and brucellosis. Ebola virus killed 9,541 people in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone and 8 people in Nigeria (Centres for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2014); rabies results in the death of between 40,000 and 70,000 people annually world-wide ( Pastoret , Gucht and  Brochier, 2014; Singh, Singh, Cherian,  Saminathan, Kapoor, Manjunatha…Dhama, 2017); 5,000 people die annually in West Africa of lassa fever (Ogbu, Ajuluchukwu and Uneke, 2007) and 12,000 people died of Swine flu in the United States in 2009 (Shrestha, Swerdlow,  Borse, Prabhu, Finelli, Atkins…Meltzer 2011). Beside morbidity and mortality, zoonotic diseases have other negative consequences such as restrictions in international trade and travels. Similarly, in countries with limited resources where zoonotic diseases are high, the health systems are usually overstretched (Jaffry, Ali, Rasool, Raza, and Gill, 2009; Katare and Kumar, 2010).

To reduce the adverse effects of zoonotic diseases, studies have been conducted; for instance, Kujul, Banyigyi, Abechi and Moses (2010); Ehizibolo, Ehizibolo, Ehizibolo, Sugun, and Idachaba (2011); Aiyedun and Olugasa (2012); Tekki et al. (2013) conducted studies on control strategies that consist of vaccine production, education and training of high risk population, mass vaccination of animals, restriction in the movement of animals, meat and milk hygiene, safe disposal of animal waste and improved by-product management. In spite of these studies aimed at reducing the problem, the incidence of zoonotic diseases still persists. To advance in the prevention and control of zoonotic diseases, scholars have stressed the need for collaborative efforts across veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals (Joshi, 2008; Ehizibolo et al., 2011; Karshima, 2012). One-way collaborative effort is made possible is through multidisciplinary knowledge sharing among various health professionals, specifically veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals. Multidisciplinary knowledge sharing among veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals is significant because it allows for the integration of expertise from different fields of knowledge which will lead to the development of cost-effective control strategies that include; organizing shared surveillance systems, common training of health professionals and  training of high risk population (Busani, Caprioli, Macrì,

Mantovani, Scavia, and Seimenis, 2006; Kahn, Kaplan and Steele, 2007; Joshi, 2008; Karshima, 2012; Zhang, Yu, Fan, and Duan, 2013). It is important to highlight that low collaboration between the human and animal health sectors is a major setback in the prevention and control of zoonotic diseases which has led to increase in human and economic losses (Wielinga and Schlundt, 2012).  Therefore, to control zoonotic diseases, there is the need to look at the problem from the perception of public health professionals about multidisciplinary knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases specifically from absorptive capacity perspective.

     1.1.1    Absorptive capacity and knowledge management

Absorptive capacity is rooted in knowledge management (Fig 1. Pg4). Knowledge management is a process for identifying, acquiring, organizing, sharing, applying and renewing knowledge that is essential to the organization (Gerami, 2010). A critical component of knowledge management is absorptive capacity (Beimborn, Moos, Wagner, and Weitzel, 2010). If knowledge management is all about harnessing the organizational knowledge resources, the resources need to be first identified, assimilated and exploited. These three components are explained thus:

Identification of knowledge is a factor of knowledge management and absorptive capacity (Gonzalez and Martins, 2017). No matter how good a knowledge is, if it is not identified it is useless. If an organisation knows the knowledge it needs, the organisation is likely to be more proactive in identifying who holds the knowledge or where the knowledge resides. Knowledge identification therefore, refers to the process of proactively identifying internal and external organisational knowledge that is useful to an organization (Tow, Venable, and Dell, 2015).

Similar to the critical understanding of how to identify knowledge is knowledge acquisition. Knowledge acquisition is the process of extracting knowledge from internal or external sources, usually from books, documents, computer files or human experts (Turban, Aronson, and Liang 2005). Knowledge acquisition process facilitates the assimilation of knowledge and experiences of different area of expertise.

When knowledge is identified and acquired, but not assimilated, it may not be used. Assimilation therefore, refers to the processes that allow the newly acquired knowledge to be processed, interpreted and incorporated into the organizational knowledge base (Hoarau, 2014). Furthermore, if valuable knowledge is identified, acquired, assimilated but not productively exploited, the time and conscious effort will be useless. Exploitation of knowledge refers to the ability to use knowledge (Vidal, 2005). Knowledge management therefore, provides a platform for knowledge sharing and absorption of knowledge.

 

 

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

IDENTIFYING            ACQUIRING                        SHARING                      ASSIMILATING           EXPLOITING

KNOWLEDGE            KNOWLEDGE                     KNOWLEDGE              KNOWLEDGE               KNOWLEDGE

POTENTIAL ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY                                                  REALISED ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY

(PACAP)                                                                                                             (RACAP)

ACQUISITION                                   ASSIMILATION                                                EXPLORATION                                      EXPLOITATION

OF EXTERNAL                                 OF EXTERNAL                                                 OF EXTERNAL                                           OF EXTERNAL

KNOWLEDGE                                   KNOWLEDGE                                                   KNOWLEDGE                                            KNOWLEDGE

 

 

FIG 1: KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMNET AND ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY MODEL. (Lakan, 2019)

     1.1.2    Absorptive capacity and knowledge sharing

Absorptive capacity and knowledge sharing are required to achieve a higher level of innovation. No matter what knowledge is acquired and assimilated, there is a critical component that needs to occur after acquisition and assimilation of knowledge which is knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing is the act of exchanging knowledge (in form of information, skills, or expertise) between individuals, multidisciplinary teams, communities of practices or within an organization (Hendricks, 2018). Through the process of sharing knowledge with others, professionals acquire new knowledge that increases their learning abilities and performance. Consequently, absorptive capacity is shaped by human resource management policies including multidisciplinary teams which are a key driver of knowledge sharing among professionals that affect the acquisition and assimilation of external knowledge.

Absorptive capacity (ACAP) as a concept was developed by Cohen and Levinthal (1989) defining it as: „the firm‟s ability to identify, assimilate and exploit knowledge from the environment‟. Subsequently they adopted a slightly wider view as: „… an ability to recognize the value of new information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends‟ (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Putting the two together provides a „classical‟ view of absorptive capacity as: the identification and recognition of new information, both internal and external, and its assimilation, application and exploitation for commercial ends. However, Zahra and George (2002) developed a model referred to as Potential Absorptive Capacity (PACAP) and Realised Absorptive Capacity (RACAP).

Potential Absorptive Capacity (PACAP) consists of two sub-elements. First, there is knowledge acquisition which refers to a firm‟s capability to acquire externally generated knowledge that is critical to its operations. Second, there is assimilation capability which refers to the firm‟s routines and processes that allow it to analyze, process, interpret and understand the information obtained from external sources. Potential Absorptive Capacity makes the firm receptive to acquiring and assimilating external knowledge.

Similarly, Realized Absorptive Capacity (RACAP) consists of two sub-elements, transformation capability on one hand that can be defined as a firm‟s capability to develop and refine the routines that facilitate combining existing knowledge and the newly acquired and assimilated knowledge. On the other hand, Realized Absorptive Capacity is also made of the exploitation capability of a firm which is basically the capacity of a firm to apply the newly acquired knowledge in products or services that it can get financial benefit from. Zahra and

George (2002) as a result, extended the definition of Cohen and Levinthal by labelling Absorptive Capacity a set of organizational routines and strategic processes by which firms acquire, assimilate, transform, and exploit knowledge for purpose of knowledge creation. The acquisition of external knowledge discussed in this study is derived from the ACAP model of Zahra and

George (2002).

     1.1.3    Absorptive Capacity and Managing Zoonotic Diseases

Acquisition of external knowledge is essential in managing zoonotic diseases. The expertise required to manage zoonotic diseases are derived from epidemiology as a knowledge domain. Epidemiology is the branch of knowledge in medicine which deals with the incidence, distribution, and control of diseases and has been recognized as an important area of knowledge for public health professionals (Zhang, Mnzava, Mitchell, Melubo, Kibona, Cleaveland 2016; Oxford English Dictionary, 2017). Studies in epidemiology cut across three public health professional‟s knowledge bases e.g. Veterinary epidemiology, Medical epidemiology and Environmental epidemiology and it is the knowledge needed to effectively manage zoonotic diseases. Therefore, public health professionals are expected to be concerned with making the most of these knowledge bases in managing zoonotic diseases. Public health professionals should be willing to acquire and increasingly invest in teamwork, routines, mechanisms, and activities that will facilitate external knowledge absorption from these knowledge bases, in order to improve their responsiveness to zoonotic diseases emergence.

However, no matter how an organization wants to develop absorptive capacity of their members, the organization must understand the various factors that are critical for knowledge sharing and these are knowledge sharing enablers. Knowledge sharing enablers are critical components for absorptive capacity and knowledge sharing. These are discussed thus:

Institutional support- For absorptive capacity and knowledge sharing to be applied to the optimum, there must be institutional support. Institutional support refers to the commitment from institutions to provide an enabling environment that encourages participation in knowledge sharing (Premkumar and Ramamurthy, 1995; Grover, 1993). Wilson and Pirrie (2000) stated that institutions promote knowledge sharing among professionals by providing employees opportunity to develop their capacity and potential through the interactions with different expertise in related field of knowledge. Closely related to institutional support is professional and cultural cohesion.

Professional and cultural cohesion plays an important role in the absorptive capacity and knowledge sharing among diverse professionals. Multidisciplinary professional teams are founded on the basis that different professional groups add a specific expertise of their profession to the solution required on a particular problem. Therefore, multidisciplinary teams with shared goals and values are an important component in knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases (Hall, 2005; Mental Health Commission, 2006).  Related to Professional and cultural cohesion is mutual trust and respect.

Mutual trust and respect for other team members is an enabler for effective knowledge sharing. The mutual trust between individuals encourages them to engage in varieties of transactions – exchange advice, information/knowledge exchange. The level of trust that exists between an individual and the recipient of the exchange resources will determine whether or not the resources are shared and how it is received. With high level of trust, a sense of companionship and team involvement is generated and a working together over time (Mickan and Rogers, 2005). Furthermore, a critical factor for knowledge sharing is funding.

Funding is a key enabler of knowledge sharing. Financial support to multidisciplinary teams is necessary for knowledge sharing to be effective. The financial support covers the cost for attending workshops, seminars and conferences, joint training programmes and research. In a situation where there is no financial support for knowledge sharing particularly across multidisciplinary boundaries, the desired result will not be achieved. Closely linked to funding is policy guideline.

A good policy guideline facilitates knowledge sharing. Policies and legislations adopted by public health professional bodies for multidisciplinary team work will enable successful knowledge sharing as it provides the framework in which health professionals operate. Policy promotes knowledge sharing particularly for a multidisciplinary knowledge sharing for achieving better outcomes (Tschannen-Moran, 2001; Dahlan, Rahman, Dahan, and Saman, 2014). Beside a policy guideline for knowledge sharing is the use of technology as enabler for knowledge sharing.

Technology facilitates communication and access to external knowledge. It is an effective and a fast medium to acquire, store, share and transfer knowledge (Milligan, 2006). Technologies that support knowledge sharing are the internet, intranet and virtual communities (Lin, 2007). Knowledge sharing enablers provide different types of techniques for knowledge sharing. These techniques provide a platform to increase the absorptive capacity of professionals. These techniques are discussed thus:

     1.1.4    Types of Knowledge Sharing Techniques

Training is a major factor in knowledge sharing and absorptive capacity. Training provides a platform for acquiring, assimilating and application of knowledge in order to improve individual, team, and organizational effectiveness (Aguinis and Kraiger, 2009). Its achievement is based on plans and strategies developed by the organisation to ensure that employees‟ knowledge is continuously updated. Training usually takes place in a formal or informal format (Ruikar, Anumba, and Egbu, 2007). Closely linked to training is community of practice (CoP).

Community of Practice (CoP) is an effective channel for the absorption of knowledge. A Community of Practice (CoP) is a framework that facilitates knowledge sharing among groups of individuals who engage in the process of collective learning around a specific topic (Langley, Patel and Houghton, 2017). Community of practice that involves a number of professionals will be an integrative mechanism in the identification, assimilation and exploitation of knowledge particularly in managing zoonotic diseases.

Similarly, face-to-face interaction is a technique that increases the absorptive capacity of professionals. Face-to-face interaction focuses on one person transferring knowledge to an individual or a group of other people. Face-to-face interactions help in increasing an individual or an organisation‟s memory and encouraging effective learning. It provides strong social ties that give rise to collective sense-making (Lang, 2001).

     1.2       Statement of the Problem

Multidisciplinary knowledge sharing among Veterinary, Medical and Environmental health professionals is essential in conducting investigations into emerging and re-emerging zoonotic diseases. Multidisciplinary knowledge sharing has the advantage of driving positive changes in zoonotic disease prevention and control, through the exchange of ideas and sharing of best practices, expertise and experience of professionals. Its importance has become imperative with the global rise in disease prevalence (AVMA, 2008). Many emerging health issues are linked to increasing contact between humans and animals and their products. The emergence and reemergence of zoonotic diseases pose a significant challenge to public health. In spite of significant progress achieved in the field of research, zoonotic disease remains a considerable public health problem in many regions of the world (Dawit, Aklilu, Gebregergs, Hasen, and Ykealo 2013). Surveys of populations at risk have shown that zoonotic diseases are more prevalent than previously anticipated in many endemic regions and control is difficult. Effective prevention and control however, requires sustained efforts over many decades (FAO/OIE/WHO, 2010).

Multidisciplinary knowledge sharing has achieved significant results in different fields of research. For instance, multidisciplinary knowledge sharing was carried out in the identification of new arenaviruses in North America (Fulhorst, Bowen, Ksiazek, Rollin, Nichol, Kosoy, and Peters, 1996). Secondly, multidisciplinary knowledge sharing was carried out in the treatment of persons with co-morbid physical and mental conditions (Mental Health Foundation, 2013). Even though the prevalence of zoonotic diseases is on the increase with devastating effect, close collaboration in the area of knowledge sharing among public health professionals in managing zoonotic disease is minimal (WHO, 2003). A guide developed by WHO (2008) on establishing collaboration between animal and human health sectors on zoonotic diseases in developing countries identified numerous difficulties relating to the effective delivery of prevention and control programmes. These include among others; minimal surveillance and information sharing. Furthermore, several studies have been conducted to show that the increase in prevalence of the diseases is due to lack of knowledge sharing by health professionals (Chomel, 2003; Kahn, 2006; Pappaioanou, 2010; WHO, 2010; Karshima, 2012; Yassif, Santhakumar, and Lightfoot, 2013). Therefore, to reduce the prevalence of zoonotic diseases, multidisciplinary knowledge sharing is essential among veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals.

 

 

     1.3       Research Questions

The following questions were answered:

  1. What is the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria?
  2. What is the absorptive capacity of public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria?
  3. What are the factors that motivate public health professionals to share knowledge in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria?
  4. What are the factors that limit knowledge sharing among public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria?
  5. How do the two constructs “reciprocity” and “trust” of Social Exchange Theory explain the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic disease in Plateau State, Nigeria?

     1.4       Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study were to determine:

  1. The perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria
  2. The absorptive capacity of public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria
  3. The factors that motivate public health professionals to share knowledge in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria
  4. The factors that limit knowledge sharing among public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State, Nigeria
  5. How the two constructs, “reciprocity” and “trust” of Social Exchange Theory explain the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic disease in Plateau State, Nigeria

     1.5       Significance of the Study

This study has conceptual significance. Conceptually, little is known about the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau state, Nigeria. This study has therefore, uncovered the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau state, Nigeria. It has also uncovered the absorptive capacity of public health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau state, Nigeria.

The conceptual constructs of the perception of public health professionals about knowledge sharing and the absorptive capacity of public health professionals are potentially useful for creating the mechanisms necessary for Public health professionals to share knowledge and become proactive in managing zoonotic diseases.

The conceptual framework will also be used to inform new approaches to multidisciplinary knowledge sharing in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau state by policy makers, health professional bodies and others involved in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State.

     1.6       Scope of the Study

The study explored the perception of Veterinary, Medical and Environmental health professionals in managing zoonotic diseases in Plateau State. The participants consist of veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals. The scope of this study is limited to four Institutions in Plateau state namely; National Veterinary Research Institute (NVRI) Vom, Jos

University Teaching Hospital (JUTH), Plateau State Specialist Hospital and Plateau State Ministry of Health. The choice of these institutions in Plateau state for the study was based on the fact that they have a high concentration of veterinary, medical and environmental health professionals that are eligible target population. Secondly, there is a high concentration of health care services involving humans, animals and the environment going on in these institutions. Jos, Plateau state is therefore, an ideal location to meet the targeted population and obtain the anticipated responses.

     1.7       Operational Definitions of Terms

The following key terms are operationally defined thus:

Absorptive Capacity: a firm’s ability to recognize the value of new information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends.

Acquisition of Knowledge: firm‟s capability to acquire externally generated knowledge that is critical to its operations.

Knowledge sharing: the act of exchanging knowledge (in form of information, skills, or expertise) between individuals, multidisciplinary teams, communities of practices or within an organization.

Management of zoonotic diseases: Control and prevention strategies aimed at reducing the adverse effects of zoonotic diseases.  

Multidisciplinary: involving several academic disciplines or professional specializations in an approach to solve problem.

Perception: the understanding of public health professionals on knowledge sharing on zoonotic diseases.

Public Health Professionals: Veterinary, Medical and Environmental Public Health professionals who focus on preventing diseases, protecting and promoting human health through organized efforts and informed choices.

Zoonotic diseases: diseases transmitted from wild and domestic animals and from their products to humans.

References

Aguinis, H. and Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and teams, organisations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology,60, 451–74.

Aiyedun, J.O., and Olugasa, B.O. (2012).  Identification and analysis of dog use, management practices and implications for rabies control in Ilorin, Nigeria. Sokoto Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 210(2),1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/sokjvs.v10i2.1 Accessed 25/sept.2014

AVMA (2008). The American veterinary medical association. One health initiative task force.

“One            health: A         new     professional     imperative”. https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Reports/Documents/onehealth_final.pdf. Accessed September 11092014.

Busani, L., Caprioli, A. L., Macrì, A. G., Mantovani, A.,   Scavia, G. and Seimenis, A. R. (2006).

Multidisciplinary collaboration in veterinary public health. Ann Ist Super Sanità., 42(4), 397-400.

Chomel, B.B. (2003). Control and prevention of emerging zoonosis. Journal of Veterinary Medical Educatio,. 30 (2), 145–147.

Cohen, W. M., and Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R and D. Economic Journal, 99, 569-596.

Cohen, W. M., and Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.

Dawit, T. G., Aklilu, H. F., Gebregergs, G. T., Hasen, Y. A. and Ykealo, B. T. (2013). Knowledge, attitude and practices of pastoral communities from Ayssaita, North-Eastern Ethiopia in relation to cystic echinococcosis and public health risks. Science Parasitology, 14(3), 121128. http://scientia.zooparaz.net/2013_14_03/sp2013121128Dawit.pdf accessed 21/09/2015  

Ehizibolo, D.O., Ehizibolo, P.O., Ehizibolo, E.E., Sugun, M.Y. and Idachaba, S.E (2011). The control of neglected zoonotic diseases in Nigeria through animal intervention. African Journal of Biomedical Research,14, 81 -88.

Encyclopaedia Britannica (2018). https://www.britannica.com/place/Plateau-state-Nigeria

FAO-OIE-WHO Collaboration (2010). Sharing responsibilities and coordinating global activities to address health risks at the animal-human-ecosystems interfaces: A tripartite concept notes http://www.who.int/influenza/resources/documents/tripartite_concept_note_hanoi/en/ accessed 21/09/2015.

Fulhorst, C.F., Bowen M.D., Ksiazek T.G., Rollin P.E., Nichol S.T., Kosoy M.Y. and Peters C.J. (1996). Isolation and characterization of white-water arroyo virus, a novel North American arenavirus. Virology, 224,114–120. DOI: 10.1006/viro.1996.0512.

Gerami, M. (2010). Knowledge Management. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 7(2), 234-238.

Gonzalez, R. V. D. and   Martins, M. F. (2017). Knowledge management process: A theoreticalconceptual. Gestão and Produção, vol.24 no.2 São Carlos Apr./June

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104530×089315 Accessed September 11-09-2015

Grover, V. (1993). An empirically derived model for the adoption of customer-based interorganisational systems. Decision Sciences, 24(3), 603-640.

Hall, P. (2005). Inter-professional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers. Journal of InterProfessional Care. Supplement 1,188 – 196.

Hendricks, B. (2018). Knowledge sharing. https://study.com/academy/lesson/knowledgesharingdefinitionprocess.html Accessed July 7th 2018

Hoarau, H. (2014). Knowledge acquisition and assimilation in tourism-innovation processes. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism,14(2),135-151. DOI: 10.1080/15022250.2014.887609

Jaffry, K.T., Ali, S., Rasool, A., Raza, A. and Gill, Z.J. (2009). Zoonoses. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 11, 217–220. Retrieved from  http://www.fspublishers.org  Accessed July 6th 2015

Joshi, D. D. (2008). Information sharing to facilitate innovation in R and D institutions and knowledge management: The Global Consortium on Zoonosis and Avian Flu. Publications of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Retrieved from

http://www.ilri.org/InfoServ/Webpub/fulldocs/Pig%20Systems_proceeding/C   H_13_Joshi.pdf  Accessed October, 27/ 2014.

Kahn, L.H (2006). Confronting zoonosis, linking human and veterinary medicine merg. Infect Dis., 12(4), 556–561. doi:10.3201/eid1204.050956 Accessed September 11-09-2014

Kahn, L. H., Kaplan B. and Steele J. H. (2007). Confronting zoonosis through closer collaboration between medicine and veterinary medicine (as „one medicine‟) Veterinaria Italiana, 43(1), 5-19. www.izs.it/vet_italiana retrieved 28th/ October, 2014

Karen, M. (2006). Using information communication and technology in work place Australian research alliance for children and youth website. www.aracy.org.auretrieved 28th/ October, 2014.

Karshima, N. S. (2012). A multidisciplinary approach in the control of zoonosis in Nigeria.

Journal of Veterinary Advances, 2(12), 557-567.

Katare, M. and Kumar, M. (2010). Emerging zoonosis and their determinants. Veterinary World, 3 (10), 481-484.

Kujul, N.N., Banyigyi, S.A., Abechi, A.S., and Moses, G.D. (2010). Rabies in 5-Week-old puppies in Jos, Plateau State Nigeria: A case report. Researcher, 2 (12). Retrieved from:  http://www.sciencepub.net/researcher August 28th 2014

Lang, J. C. (2001). Managerial concerns in knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management,1 (1), 43-57.

Lin, H. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332. Retrieved from  www.emeraldinsight.com/01437720.htm 28th August 2014  

Mental Health Foundation (2013). Crossing boundaries: Final inquiry. Kings College London. www.mentalhealth.org.uk/ Accessed 15/10/2015.

Mental Health Commission (2006). Multidisciplinary team working: From theory to practice. Retrieved from www.mhcirl.ie 28th August 2014.

Ogbu, O., Ajuluchukwu, E., and Uneke, C.J. (2007). Lassa fever in West African sub-region: An overview. Journal of vector borne diseases, 44(1), 1–11.

PMID 17378212.OxfordEnglishDictionary,(2017)

https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/press/news/2017/6/27/oxfordenglishdictionaryoedJune2017update Retrieved 23/06/2018

Pappaioanou, M. (2010). Achieving effective inter-sectoral collaboration to prevent: Working

Paper:                    EERG/CGHS                     01/10.                    Accessed                     from

https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Energy%2C%20Environ ment%20and%20Development/0410zoonoticdiseases_wp.pdf17th March 2015

Pastoret, P.P., Gucht, S. V., and Brochier, B. (2014). Eradicating rabies at source. Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 33 (2), 509-519.

Premkumar, G. and Ramamurthy, K. (1995). “The role of inter-organisational and organisational factors on the decision mode for adoption of inter-organisational systems.” Decision Sciences, 26(3), 303-336.

Ruikar, K., Anumba, C.J., and Egbu, C. (2007). Integrated use of technologies and techniques for construction of knowledge management. Research and Practice, 5 (4), 297-311.

Shrestha, S.S., Swerdlow, D.L., Borse, R.H., Prabhu, V.S., Finelli, L., Atkins, C.Y., and Meltzer, M.I. (2011). Estimating the burden of 2009 pandemic influenza, A (H1N1) in the United States (April 2009-April 2010). Clinical Infectious Diseases,1(52) Suppl 1,75-82. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciq012

Singh, R., Singh, K. P., Cherian, S., Saminathan, M., Kapoor, S., Manjunatha, R, G.B.; … Dhama,

  1. (2017). Rabies epidemiology, pathogenesis, public health concerns and advances in diagnosis and control: A comprehensive review. Veterinary Quarterly, 37(1), 212-251. DOI: 10.1080/01652176.2017.1343516

Tekki, I.S, Nwosu, C.  and Okewole, P. A. (2013). Challenges and Prospects of Anti-Rabies Vaccines Production in Nigeria. Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, 4:8 http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157

Tow, W.N.H; Venable, J. R.; and Dell, P. (2015). “Developing a theory of knowledge identification Effectiveness in Knowledge Management”. PACIS 2015 Proceedings 85. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2015/85 Accessed September 11-09-2015

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of educational administration Vol39 No. 4, 308-331 www.emeraldlibrary.com/ft Accessed September 11-09-2014

Vidal, P. (2005). Exploration & Exploitation: Knowledge Creation in a Biotechnology Firm Doctorate dissertation Boston University. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/conf/olkc/archive/oklc6/papers/vidal.pdf Accessed 1/8/2018

WHO (2003). Main Challenges in the Control of Zoonotic Diseases in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: Regional Committee for the EM/RC50/7 Eastern Mediterranean (Technical Paper) August  www.emro.who.int/docs/em_rc50_7_en.pdf Accessed on 14/ October, 2015

WHO (2003). Regional Committee for the EM/RC50/7 Eastern Mediterranean (Technical Paper) August 2003 http://applications.emro.who.int/docs/em_rc50_7_en.pdf 21/09/2015

WHO (2008). Zoonotic diseases : a guide to establishing collaboration between animal and human health sectors at the country level https://www.oie.int/doc/ged/D12060.PDF Accessed 28/3/19

WHO (2010). The Control of Neglected Zoonotic Diseases Community-based interventions for NZDs prevention and control report of the third conference organized with ICONZ, DFIDRiU, SOS, EU, TDR and FAO with the participation of ILRI and OIE; 23–24 November,

WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland Accessed from https://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/zoonoses/9789241502528/en/  14th October, 2015

Wielinga, P. R and, Schlundt, J. (2012). Food Safety: at the center of a One Health approach for combating zoonoses. Current topics in microbiology and immunology, 366: 3-17. doi: 10.1007/82_2012_238.

Yassif, J.; Santhakumar, A.; Lightfoot N. (2013) Enhancing Global Security through Infectious Disease Threat Reduction Connecting Organizations for Regional Disease Surveillance/ Global Health Security 2013/01 www.chathamhouse.org Accessed 14/October, 2015

Zahra, S. A., and George, G. (2002). Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and

Extension. The Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185-203.  doi: 10.2307/4134351

Zhang, C.; Yu, Q.; Fan, Q. and Duan, Z. (2013). BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2013, 13:52 doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-52

Zhang, H.L., Mnzava, K.W., Mitchell, S.T., Melubo, M.L., Kibona, T.J., Cleaveland, S., et al. (2016). Mixed methods survey of zoonotic disease awareness and practice among animal and human healthcare providers in Moshi, Tanzania. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 10 (3), 0004476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004476

DATA DISTRIBUTION AMONG PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALISTS ON ZOONOTIC DISEASES IN PLATEAU STATE, NIGERIA  

Sharing is caring!

Leave a Reply