Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25888877›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2015

Ready for phase 5 - current status of ethnobiology in Southeast Asia.

Syafitri Hidayati, F Merlin Franco, Rainer W Bussmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. The global relevance of locally grounded ethnobiology.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2024
    Article
  5. Biology · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Syafitri HidayatiCurtin Sarawak Research Institute, Curtin University Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009, Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia. syafitrihidayati@gmail.com.
F Merlin FrancoCurtin Sarawak Research Institute, Curtin University Sarawak Malaysia, CDT 250, 98009, Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia. tropicalforezt@gmail.com.
Rainer W BussmannWilliam L. Brown Center, Missouri Botanical Garden, P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, MO, 63166-0299, USA. rainer.bussmann@mobot.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSoutheast Asia is known for its rich linguistic, cultural and biological diversity. While ethnobiology in the west has benefitted greatly from intellectual and methodological advances over the last decades, the status of Southeast Asian ethnobiology is largely unknown. This study aims to provide an analysis of the current status of ethnobiology in Southeast Asia and outlines possibilities for future advancements.

methodsWe accessed papers cited in the Scopus and Web of Science databases for the period of 1960 to 2014 using the current as well as previous names of the 11 Southeast Asian countries and various disciplines of ethnobiology as key words. We juxtaposed the number of publications from each country against its number of indigenous groups and languages, to see if ethnobiology research has addressed this full spectrum of ethnical diversity. The available data for the last ten years was analysed according to the five phases concept to understand the nature of studies dominating Southeast Asian ethnobiology. RESULTS AND

conclusionsA total number of 312 publications were recorded in the databases for the period 1960-2014. Indonesia ranks highest (93 studies), followed by Thailand (68), Malaysia (58) Philippines (42), Vietnam (31), Laos (29), and other Southeast Asian countries (44). A strong correlation was found between the number of publications for each country, the number of indigenous groups, and the number of endangered languages. Comparing the data available for the period 2005-2009 with 2010-2014, we found a strong increase in the number of phase 5 publications. However, papers with bioprospecting focus were also on the rise, especially in Malaysia. Our study indicates that ethnobiologists still need to realise the full potential of the Biocultural Diversity of Southeast Asia, and that there is a strong need to focus more on socially relevant research.

Indexed as

EthnobotanyAsia, SoutheasternBibliometricsBiodiversityEcologyEthnicityHumansIndonesiaLaosMalaysiaPhilippinesThailandVietnam

Identifiers

PMID25888877
PMCPMC4342206

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.