Notice bibliographique
Résumé
More than 650 people from around 60 countries attended the 1st International One Health Conference, held in Melbourne from 14 to 16 February 2011. Scientists, clinicians, government and community members from a range of disciplines came together to discuss the benefits of working together to promote a One Health approach to human, animal and environmental health. One Health embraces systems thinking and recognising the interdependence of people, animals and environment. The conference was hosted by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and was supported by international agencies, the Australian and Canadian governments, and industry.The Organising Committee recognised from the outset, the need to provide a forum not just for scientific presentation, but for open discussion and dialogue around the policy and political issues, as well as the science that drives the One Health agenda. The Committee was also cognizant of the need to embrace a definition of One Health that includes food security and food safety and included the social and economic pressures that shapes this area. The meeting was therefore organised under four themes with plenary sessions followed by breakout parallel sessions for each of these. The themes covered Disease Emergence, Environmental Drivers, Trade, Food Security and Food Safety, and Science Policy and Political Action. The plenary session commenced with one or two keynote presentations by world leaders on the topic being covered, followed by panel discussions involving six to eight experts and involving all participants at the congress. Each of the panel members spoke briefly on the topic covered by the keynote speaker and were asked to be as provocative as possible. The discussions that followed allowed debate and discussion on the keynote presentations and the panel members comments. This was followed by six to eight parallel breakout sessions involving in depth papers on the session’s topic. Throughout the conference at various times, sponsored sessions dealt with particular areas of science or policy providing a further framework not only to learn current science but for debate and discussion. A full copy of all abstracts is available on the web at http://www.springerlink.com.In concluding the Congress recognised the interdependence of, and seeks to improve human, animal and environmental health; recognised that communication, collaboration and trust between human and animal health practitioners is at the heart of the One Health concept; agreed that a broad vision that includes other disciplines such as economics and social behaviour is essential to success. The Congress stressed the need to promote the ‘do-able’ such as improving surveillance and response for emerging infectious diseases whilst developing the broader approach. It identified a need to emphasise community participation and development of community capacity, and especially, an open transparent dialogue with both a ‘ground up’ and ‘top down’ approach that would lead to an improved understanding of our ecosystems, including molecular ecobiology, are an essential part of One Health.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».