4.6 Article

One Health or Three? Publication Silos Among the One Health Disciplines

期刊

PLOS BIOLOGY
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002448

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation through NSF [DBI-1300426]
  2. University of Tennessee, Knoxville
  3. Penn State academic computing fellowship
  4. Morris Animal Foundation [D13ZO-081]
  5. University of Bristol
  6. NSF GRFP
  7. Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act under Michigan Pittman-Robertson Project [W-147-R]
  8. Colorado State University
  9. USDA [13-9208-0346-CA]
  10. NSF [DEB-1413925]
  11. Cooperative State Research Service (USDA) [MINV 62-044, 62-051]
  12. Direct For Biological Sciences
  13. Division Of Environmental Biology [1413925] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The One Health initiative is a global effort fostering interdisciplinary collaborations to address challenges in human, animal, and environmental health. While One Health has received considerable press, its benefits remain unclear because its effects have not been quantitatively described. We systematically surveyed the published literature and used social network analysis to measure interdisciplinarity in One Health studies constructing dynamic pathogen transmission models. The number of publications fulfilling our search criteria increased by 14.6% per year, which is faster than growth rates for life sciences as a whole and for most biology subdisciplines. Surveyed publications clustered into three communities: one used by ecologists, one used by veterinarians, and a third diverse-authorship community used by population biologists, mathematicians, epidemiologists, and experts in human health. Overlap between these communities increased through time in terms of author number, diversity of co-author affiliations, and diversity of citations. However, communities continue to differ in the systems studied, questions asked, and methods employed. While the infectious disease research community has made significant progress toward integrating its participating disciplines, some segregation-especially along the veterinary/ecological research interface-remains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据