MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408020095 · doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2025.101007

Insights and future directions: Applying the One Health approach in international agricultural research for development to address food systems challenges

2025· review· en· W4408020095 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hung Nguyen‐Viet, Steven Lâm, Silvia Alonso, Fred Unger, Arshnee Moodley, Bernard Bett, Eric M. Fèvre, Théodore Knight-Jones, Siobhan M. Mor, Ha Thi Thanh Nguyen, Delia Grace

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Texas Medical Branch at GalvestonAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchSino-Danish CenterConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersBill and Melinda Gates FoundationInternational Livestock Research InstituteBundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und EntwicklungInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsContext (archaeology)One HealthAgricultureLivestockPsychological interventionGrey literatureFood systemsBusinessPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningFood securityEnvironmental resource managementPublic healthMEDLINEMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For more than 15 years, the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) has been striving to understand and address One Health challenges at the intersection of livestock, humans, and the environment. We present an overview of ILRI One Health projects implemented with partners across Asia and Africa, reflecting on key learnings and future directions for One Health research and food systems transformation. Drawing on a review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, we analyzed processes and outcomes of ILRI-led and supported initiatives using a realist evaluation framework (context, mechanisms, outcomes), and present insights within select One Health topic areas such as zoonoses, food safety, antimicrobial resistance. Our findings emphasize the need for stronger cross-sectoral collaboration, greater engagement with policymakers to translate research findings into actionable strategies, and the development of adaptable and context-specific interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0140.018
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne HealthSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207