Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31466221›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019

The Significance of Social Perceptions in Implementing Successful Feral Cat Management Strategies: A Global Review.

Brooke P Deak, Bertram Ostendorf, David A Taggart, David E Peacock, Douglas K Bardsley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The impacts of biological invasions.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Wildcat That Lives in Me: A Review on Free-Roaming Cats (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Public Opinions on Stray Cats in China, Evidence from Social Media Data.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

Brooke P DeakSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. brooke.deak@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-7445-5812
Bertram OstendorfSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. bertram.ostendorf@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5868-3567
David A TaggartSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
David E PeacockSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.
Douglas K BardsleySchool of Social Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review examines the social aspects that influence feral cat management. In particular, it examines definitions and perceptions of feral cats as a species in different countries and across cultures. Using case studies from around the world, we investigate the factors that can influence public perceptions and social acceptance of feral cats and management methods. The review then highlights the importance of social factors in management and suggests the best approach to use in the future to ease the process of gaining a social license for management campaigns. Implications of the influence of education and awareness on public perception and acceptance are further explained, and are suggested to be an essential tool in successfully engaging the community about management in the future.

Indexed as

community engagementFelis catusinvasive species managementpublic relationsscience communicationsocial science

Identifiers

PMID31466221
PMCPMC6770462

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.