MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417529124 · doi:10.1016/j.bsheal.2025.12.004

China’s malaria elimination: One Health lessons for vector-borne disease governance

2025· article· en· W4417529124 on OpenAlexaff
Jianying Liu, Yang Liu, Gong Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueBiosafety and Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaKey Technologies Research and Development ProgramNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMalariaCertificationCorporate governanceDocumentationClinical governancePublic healthDisease controlControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• China’s malaria elimination offers a globally transferable One Health governance model. • Integration of human, ecological, and vector surveillance supported sustained control. • Cross-border collaboration strengthened regional capacity for early detection. • Ecological and microbial approaches supported cost-effective vector control strategies. • Technological innovation and predictive governance promote adaptive vector management. China’s certification as malaria-free by the World Health Organization in 2021 marked the achievement of seven decades of adaptive surveillance, evolving strategies, and community engagement. The British Medical Journal series led by Qiyong Liu and colleagues provides comprehensive documentation of this process through regional case studies in Hainan, the Huai River Basin, and Yunnan, as well as national strategies and larval management priorities. This perspective interprets those findings within a One Health governance framework, emphasizing how China’s success demonstrates the value of integrated surveillance, regional cooperation, ecological intervention, and technological innovation. Together, these four pillars outline a pathway for sustainable vector control governance and future prevention of vector-borne diseases in an era of ecological disruption and climate change.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Theoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiosafety and HealthSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207