Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41815521›Full record

ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026

Why One Health struggles: A critical analysis.

Júlio Belo Fernandes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. One Health: An epistemological genealogy.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

1 author.

Júlio Belo FernandesEgas Moniz Center for Interdisciplinary Research (CiiEM), Egas Moniz School of Health & Science, 2829-511, Caparica, Almada, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The One Health approach has become a prominent paradigm in global health, promoting integrated action across human, animal, and environmental systems. Despite its conceptual strength and broad institutional endorsement, its translation into sustained governance and practice has been uneven. This viewpoint argues that the main challenges faced by One Health are not conceptual but structural. Drawing on critical analysis, it examines how sectoral governance arrangements, depoliticised notions of integration, operational ambiguity, siloed professional education, and crisis-oriented policy logics constrain implementation. The paper further argues that treating integration as a primarily technical task obscures underlying issues of power, accountability, and epistemic boundaries. As an alternative, One Health is reframed as articulation work, emphasising the deliberate construction of interfaces, communication infrastructures, and shared practices across enduring institutional boundaries. Approached as a maturing project, One Health requires long-term investment in education, organisational learning, and governance mechanisms that enable collaboration to become routine rather than exceptional.

Indexed as

Health governanceHealth promotion and preventionImplementation challengesIntersectoral collaborationOne health

Identifiers

PMID41815521
PMCPMC12972729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.