Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28584175›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2017

One Health, emerging infectious diseases and wildlife: two decades of progress?

Andrew A Cunningham, Peter Daszak, James L N Wood

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 245 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
245citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
32.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

245 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 613 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Climate change and antimicrobial resistance.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

185 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew A CunninghamInstitute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London NW1 4RY, UK a.cunningham@ioz.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3543-6504
Peter DaszakEcohealth Alliance, 460 West 34th Street, New York, NY 10001, USA.
James L N WoodDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Disease Dynamics Unit, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES, UK.
EcoHealth Alliance · USUniversity of Cambridge · GBZoological Society of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infectious diseases affect people, domestic animals and wildlife alike, with many pathogens being able to infect multiple species. Fifty years ago, following the wide-scale manufacture and use of antibiotics and vaccines, it seemed that the battle against infections was being won for the human population. Since then, however, and in addition to increasing antimicrobial resistance among bacterial pathogens, there has been an increase in the emergence of, mostly viral, zoonotic diseases from wildlife, sometimes causing fatal outbreaks of epidemic proportions. Concurrently, infectious disease has been identified as an increasing threat to wildlife conservation. A synthesis published in 2000 showed common anthropogenic drivers of disease threats to biodiversity and human health, including encroachment and destruction of wildlife habitat and the human-assisted spread of pathogens. Almost two decades later, the situation has not changed and, despite improved knowledge of the underlying causes, little has been done at the policy level to address these threats. For the sake of public health and wellbeing, human-kind needs to work better to conserve nature and preserve the ecosystem services, including disease regulation, that biodiversity provides while also understanding and mitigating activities which lead to disease emergence. We consider that holistic, One Health approaches to the management and mitigation of the risks of emerging infectious diseases have the greatest chance of success.This article is part of the themed issue 'One Health for a changing world: zoonoses, ecosystems and human well-being'.

Indexed as

One HealthAnimalsAnimals, WildBiodiversityCommunicable Diseases, EmergingEcosystemHumansZoonosesecosystem servicesemerging infectious diseaseOne Healthpolicywildlife diseasezoonoses

Identifiers

PMID28584175
PMCPMC5468692
OpenAlexW2621121385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.