Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29312833›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2018

Geo-referencing bird-window collisions for targeted mitigation.

R Scott Winton, Natalia Ocampo-Peñuela, Nicolette Cagle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. "Flora of Russia" on iNaturalist: a dataset.Biodiversity data journal · 2020
    Article
  5. 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.

R Scott WintonDepartment of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Natalia Ocampo-PeñuelaDepartment of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Nicolette CagleNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bird collisions with windows are an important conservation concern. Efficient mitigation efforts should prioritize retrofitting sections of glass exhibiting the highest mortality of birds. Most collision studies, however, record location meta-data at a spatial scale too coarse (i.e., compass direction of facing façade) to be useful for large buildings with complex geometries. Through spatial analysis of three seasons of survey data at a large building at a university campus, we found that GPS data were able to identify collision hotspots while compass directions could not. To demonstrate the broad applicability and utility of this georeferencing approach, we identified collision hotspots at two additional urban areas in North America. The data for this latter exercise were collected via the citizen science database, iNaturalist, which we review for its potential to generate the georeferenced data necessary for directing building retrofits and mitigating a major source of anthropogenic bird mortality.

Indexed as

Bird conservationBird window collisionsCitizen scienceGeoreferencingUrban ecology

Identifiers

PMID29312833
PMCPMC5756612

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.