Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32596060›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2020

Bird-window collisions: different fall and winter risk and protective factors.

Barbara B Brown, Lia Hunter, Sabrina Santos

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barbara B BrownFamily & Consumer Studies, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
Lia HunterEnvironmental and Sustainability Studies, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
Sabrina SantosEnvironmental and Sustainability Studies, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
University of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo reduce bird fatalities from millions of window collisions each year in North America, it is important to understand how design and landscape elements relate to collision risk. The current study extends prior research that found that buildings near ornamental pear trees (

methodsTrained observers monitored buildings three times per week in Fall (September 12 to October 27, 2019) and Winter (October 29, 2019 to January 24, 2020). Collisions were photographed and documented in the iNaturalist University of Utah Bird Window Collision Project.

resultsThere were 39 total collisions, from 0 to 14 per building DISCUSSION: This research provides the first peer-reviewed evidence found for the efficacy of bird-friendly fritted windows and ORNILUX ® UV windows in buildings. In addition, it replicated a study that established the dangers of mirrored windows and fruiting pear trees near buildings. These risks were especially dangerous to Cedar Waxwings, who constituted 62.2% of the identifiable window collision victims. This research highlights how building risks depend on window design, landscape choices, species, and season. If replicated, analyses of risk factors can help identify buildings that require mitigation to make existing windows less deadly. Results also support the installation of bird-friendly glass in new or renovated buildings to reduce fatalities.

Indexed as

BirdBird-friendly windowCedar WaxwingsFritted windowFruiting treesPear treesPreventionReflective windowsSeasonsWindow collision/strikes

Identifiers

PMID32596060
PMCPMC7307557
OpenAlexW3036000059

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.