ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2024
Global Health and Peace: The Elusive Path with a Focus on Palestine, Ukraine, and Venezuela.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking Public Health Approaches to Crisis Response: Putting People First.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Suboptimal Attainment of Global Goals of Human Rights, Universal Health Coverage and Sustainable Development Goals in Gaza During 2023-2024.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The interrelationality of health and peace is complex, multifactorial, and imbued with political and economic challenges. Peace and health outcomes reflect shared fundamental values related to the achievement of a balanced holistic condition on the individual and collective level. This causal relationship between social inequity and health requires special attention be paid to the impact of political instability and structural violence on undermining health systems in conflict zones. The mutual dependency between peace and health means that peace cannot be achieved without the existence of physical, mental, social, and spiritual health, and holistic health cannot be sustained under violent conditions. The interrelationality of peace and health as mutual conditions shapes our understanding of global solidarity and advocacy in relation to health diplomacy and peace promotion if addressed equally across all conflict zones. This commentary analyzes the unique interdisciplinary contextual factors that contribute to, or undermine the realization of global health and peace in three active conflict zones: Palestine, Ukraine, and Venezuela. Contextual analysis, review of the evidence, and synthesis of the authors' perspectives were used. The health-peace nexus remains a theoretical approach and lacks real application in most settings under crisis. Peace is a multifaceted phenomenon that necessitates the participation, dedication, and action of all sectors and stakeholders in global societies, including health policymakers, scientists, professionals, and people. Both the "right to health" and the "right to peace" even at the minimum remains unfulfilled, particularly in Palestine, and can be realized through two trajectories: (1) honest, responsible, and fair accountability, transparency, and political commitment empowered by reliable global health diplomacy for maintaining peace, eliminating the roots of injustice, and protecting health systems, and (2) equitable and real implementation of peace-health approaches, policies and actions driven by monitoring mechanisms that promote health, well-being, health security and equity for all nations under conflicts.
Indexed as
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.