ArticlePLoS biology2016
Languages Are Still a Major Barrier to Global Science.
Article in PLoS biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 121 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
121 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- No Evidence for Pace of Life Evolution Along Elevational Gradients in Squamate Reptiles.Ecology letters · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review of global historical marine ecology reveals geographical and taxonomic research gaps and biases.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Climate change effects on ecosystem services: Disentangling drivers of mixed responses.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Climate change and the global redistribution of biodiversity: substantial variation in empirical support for expected range shifts.Environmental evidence · 2023Pooled it
- A comprehensive systematic review of colorectal cancer screening clinical practices guidelines and consensus statements.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review of snake translocations to identify potential tactics for reducing postrelease effects.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2023Pooled it
- Global environmental changes more frequently offset than intensify detrimental effects of biological invasions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Pooled it
- Quality and reporting of clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment: A systematic review.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020Pooled it
- Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Building a green Belt and Road: A systematic review and comparative assessment of the Chinese and English-language literature.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Plant Extracts in the Bone Repair Process: A Systematic Review.Mediators of inflammation · 2019Pooled it
- The Algorithm's Blindspot: An Ethical Critique of Data-Fetishism and the Deskilling of the Clinical Gaze in Ophthalmology.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Article
- Economic Costs of Biological Invasions in Marine Systems.Integrative zoology · 2026Article
- State of darkness protection in strategic lighting documents of 10 European cities.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2026Article
- ChinaSoilSeedBank: A dataset on species diversity and composition of soil seed bank in China.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Applications of Large Language Models in Medical Research: From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Studies.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evolution of research on global amphibian declines.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
- Beyond Translation: Building a Lusophone Alliance for Cardiovascular Care.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2026Article
- Navigating interdisciplinary coastal research in the UK: Challenges and solutions from an early career perspective.Cambridge prisms. Coastal futures · 2026Article
61 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
While it is recognized that language can pose a barrier to the transfer of scientific knowledge, the convergence on English as the global language of science may suggest that this problem has been resolved. However, our survey searching Google Scholar in 16 languages revealed that 35.6% of 75,513 scientific documents on biodiversity conservation published in 2014 were not in English. Ignoring such non-English knowledge can cause biases in our understanding of study systems. Furthermore, as publication in English has become prevalent, scientific knowledge is often unavailable in local languages. This hinders its use by field practitioners and policy makers for local environmental issues; 54% of protected area directors in Spain identified languages as a barrier. We urge scientific communities to make a more concerted effort to tackle this problem and propose potential approaches both for compiling non-English scientific knowledge effectively and for enhancing the multilingualization of new and existing knowledge available only in English for the users of such knowledge.
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.