ArticleCurrent opinion in environmental sustainability2013
Different ontologies: land change science and health research.
Article in Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semi-Supervised Text Classification Framework: An Overview of Dengue Landscape Factors and Satellite Earth Observation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
- Land use as a mediating factor of fertility in the Amazon.Population and environment · 2016Article
- Public health impacts of ecosystem change in the Brazilian Amazon.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- Conservation efforts and malaria in the Brazilian Amazon.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2014Article
- Land System Science: between global challenges and local realities.Current opinion in environmental sustainability · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Land use and land cover (LULC) is now recognized as an important driver of disease. For emerging or re-emerging infectious diseases, LULC offers context and serves as a likely proximate driver of risk particularly when considering vector-borne or zoonotic diseases. Ontological differences embedded within disciplinary structures impede progress limiting the ultimate potential of both LULC data and land change theory within disease research. Geography, space, and time serve as effective complements to traditional health and place organizational and disease-research strategies. Improved systemic clarity is obtained if one orients the disease relationship to particular contexts and if the scales of the relationships are clearly defined.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.