Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42865873›Full record

ArticleGeoHealth2026

Rebuilding GeoHealth: Science, Governance, and Resilience After 2025.

Jennifer R Bratburd, Gaige H Kerr, Kishla Askins, Paula R Buchanan, Bailey Magers, Ray Yeager, Ryan S D Calder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GeoHealth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Jennifer R BratburdCenter for Sustainability and the Global Environment University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison WI USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5787-1470
Gaige H KerrDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health George Washington University Washington DC USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8869-0752
Kishla AskinsPolar Pangea Omaha NE USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4142-5987
Paula R BuchananNational Center for Domestic Preparedness (NCDP) Columbia Climate School New York NY USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4134-9036
Bailey MagersDepartment of Civil Engineering Research Foundation of the City University of New York New York NY USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9953-6651
Ray YeagerSchool of Medicine University of Louisville Louisville KY USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5897-1913
Ryan S D CalderDepartment of Population Health Sciences Virginia Tech Blacksburg VA USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5618-9840

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent U.S. federal policy changes have created disruption and uncertainty for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners in GeoHealth, the interlocking sciences connecting Earth systems to human health and wellbeing. The termination of billions of dollars in research and implementation funding, the dismantling of data systems and regulatory authority, and reductions in scientific workforce capacity have had cascading domestic and global consequences. These changes affect research and public health workflows, health outcomes, and the institutions that create evidence-based policy. This contributes to growing polarization in trust of science and reduces its policy relevance. In this Article, we assess the implications of these changes for GeoHealth governance and identify strategies to stabilize and rebuild the field. While federal leadership is crucial for scientific funding and policy coordination, the dependence of the research and science-policy communities on federal resources has created an unacceptable exposure to political volatility and influence. We propose reforms to limit disruption of funded research, expand partnerships with state and local governments, strengthen statutory protections for scientific infrastructure, and develop more reciprocal international collaborations that reduce systemic dependence on U.S. capacity. We also highlight the need to realign academic incentives to support public engagement, actionable research, and evidence-based policy. These recommendations aim to inform policymakers, research institutions, and funding agencies on the scope of and possible responses to the current crisis in order to preserve the benefits of coordinated federal science while building a more resilient and accountable system of research, policy, and practice.

Indexed as

environmental healthGeoHealthscience governancescience policyscience‐policy interfacescientific infrastructure

Identifiers

PMID42865873
PMCPMC13655975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.