Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26005230›Full record

ArticleClimatic change

Authorship in IPCC AR5 and its implications for content: climate change and Indigenous populations in WGII.

James D Ford, Will Vanderbilt, Lea Berrang-Ford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Climatic change. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Holding Two Worlds, Keeping Art Alive: ArtVoice As a Method to Explore Indigenous Knowledges in Zenadth Kes.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Phylogeography ofFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Climate for women in climate science: Women scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Indigenous health and climate change.American journal of public health · 2012
    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.

James D FordDepartment of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, QC Canada.
Will VanderbiltDepartment of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, QC Canada.
Lea Berrang-FordDepartment of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, QC Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This essay examines the extent to which we can expect Indigenous Knowledge, understanding, and voices on climate change ('Indigenous content') to be captured in WGII of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), based on an analysis of chapter authorship. Reviewing the publishing history of 309 chapter authors (CAs) to WGII, we document 9 (2.9%) to have published on climate change and Indigenous populations and involved as authors in 6/30 chapters. Drawing upon recent scholarship highlighting how authorship affect structure and content of assessment reports, we argue that, unaddressed, this will affect the extent to which Indigenous content is examined and assessed. While it is too late to alter the structure of AR5, there are opportunities to prioritize the recruitment of contributing authors and reviewers with expertise on Indigenous issues, raise awareness among CAs on the characteristics of impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability faced by Indigenous peoples, and highlight how Indigenous perspectives can help broaden our understanding of climate change and policy interventions.

Identifiers

PMID26005230
PMCPMC4439732

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.