The One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One Health is an integrative and systemic approach to health, based on the understanding that human, animal and ecosystem health are inextricably linked. These interconnections and vulnerabilities were once more clearly demonstrated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This led the heads of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH; founded as OIE), to enhance their science-based cross-sectoral collaboration by creating a multidisciplinary One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP) to provide technical and scientific advice on One Health issues. Out of over 700 applications from all over the world, the four international partners FAO, WHO, WOAH and UNEP selected 26 experts from 24 countries as members of the OHHLEP. The multisectoral and transdisciplinary expertise present in OHHLEP members covers a wide range including animal, human and environmental health, biodiversity conservation and social sciences. The panel was conceived following a proposal by the French and German governments at the Paris Peace Forum in November 2020. It drew on the already existing FAO-OIE-WHO Tripartite intersectoral cooperation on One Health issues. In 2021, UNEP joined to form the Tripartite plus UNEP which was formally transformed into the ‘Quadripartite Collaboration for One Health’ in March 2022 and which now acts as the partner for engaging with OHHLEP. This is the first time that a global advisory panel on One Health has been created as a centre for expert advice. The OHHLEP convened for the first time on May 17, 2021 supported by a Secretariat that includes representation from each of the Quadripartite partners. WHO hosts the OHHLEP secretariat for the period 2021 to 2024, with this role rotating among the other partners in future years. At the inception meeting, Wanda Markotter and Thomas C. Mettenleiter were nominated as OHHLEP Co-Chairs and Dominique Charron was nominated Rapporteur. Biographies of OHHLEP members, reports of OHHLEP’s meetings, and related documents are available at https://www.who.int/groups/one-health-high-level-expert-panel/members .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.104 | 0.049 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.019 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".