Analytics · AMR use case

Review an AMR programme.

Should a programme tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR) receive funding? Analytics examines public plans and reports, research and surveillance data, and funding records. You receive a brief with its sources, covering existing funding, overlap with other programmes and questions that remain open.

Discuss your AMR question Explore Analytics
General AgentBrain demo showing source connections and review states, not an AMR analysis
Illustrative view of an AgentBrain demo. It shows neither an AMR analysis nor customer results. The figures shown are not evidence of performance.
The practical question

What is funded, and what is delivered?

Before committing funding, you need to know which programmes already exist and whether the proposal fills a gap. We compare the relevant sources. Health funding is attributed to AMR only when the records support that connection.

PlanCheck commitmentsWhat has been promised, and who is responsible for delivery?
SourcesAssess observationsWhat did surveillance and research observe? Which areas and periods do the data cover?
FundingTrace fundingDirect AMR funding is distinguished from related programmes and funds whose purpose is unclear.
DeliveryCompare recordsProcurement and disbursement records are compared with project delivery reports.
OutcomeExamine resultsA result is linked to a programme only when the sources establish the connection.
What Analytics contributes

What is a finding based on?

Traceability

Return to the source

You can check which records a finding rests on. Earlier findings and missing evidence are also kept in the review record.

Review

Assess the evidence

We mark how far a source supports a finding. Two records covering similar topics do not by themselves establish a connection between their programmes.

Next step

Choose the next check

Open questions are considered in terms of whether an answer could change the decision. This helps your team choose what to check next.

Alpha · Research agent

How Alpha helps with research.

Alpha is the research agent for this AMR use case. It helps examine sources on countries, funding and programmes and prepares findings with their supporting records. Your team uses its expertise to review the conclusions.

AskDefine the questionTogether, we narrow down the country, portfolio or programme question.
TraceFind recordsAlpha searches public sources relevant to the agreed question.
ReviewAssess findingsSupported and partly supported findings are distinguished from open questions.
PreparePrepare the briefDepending on the question: a brief, source list, funding overview or table of findings and sources.
ApproveExpert reviewYour team reviews claims before they are used publicly.

More about working with Alpha. The research agent supports source review within Analytics, working to the agreed question.

Explore the Alpha use case

What you can review

A funding decision requires a distinction between what was promised, what was delivered and what results were observed. The review groups the available evidence accordingly and identifies missing information, so you can see what needs following up before the decision.

Limits of the review

Medical decisions

Analytics does not make clinical or medical decisions.

Missing sources

A lack of public evidence does not establish that nothing is happening in the country.

Responsibility

Your team reviews sources and methods and is responsible for the funding decision. Analytics does not decide autonomously.

Which AMR programme are you reviewing? Describe your question and the records you have. Together, we establish whether a scoped Evidence Sprint fits.

Discuss a question
See the AMR Proof Stack (external site) for the basis of the method. This page explains the use case and method; it is not evidence of customer outcomes or clinical effectiveness.