ArticleAmerican journal of primatology2020
Is 2020 the year when primatologists should cancel fieldwork? A reply.
Article in American journal of primatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- SARS-CoV-2 and wastewater: What does it mean for non-human primates?American journal of primatology · 2022Article
- Variation in predicted COVID-19 risk among lemurs and lorises.American journal of primatology · 2021Article
- Learning from lockdown - Assessing the positive and negative experiences, and coping strategies of researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic.Applied animal behaviour science · 2021Article
- Social Network Predicts Exposure to Respiratory Infection in a Wild Chimpanzee Group.EcoHealth · 2020Article
- Is 2020 the year when primatologists should cancel fieldwork? A reply.American journal of primatology · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this article is to explore the impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on primate-related conservation work. The withdrawal of primatologists and conservation staff from field research can lead to a number of detrimental effects not just on conservation but also on local communities in low- and middle-income countries. Inequalities in access to health and financial insecurities may be drivers for the illegal wildlife trade and the lack of tourism and research activity may allow poachers to work with greater ease. The paper also looks at how conservation organizations and research bodies should modify their field protocols by developing robust occupational health policies that will not only make field work safer but also support local staff as they are likely to face the greatest threats to their physical health, psychological health, and economic loss from COVID-19. By adopting a One Health approach that considers the complex interactions between human and primate health, researchers will be able to find new ways of working not only to protect primates but understand how they adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.