Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33634525›Full record

ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2022

Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife.

Sara Kophamel, Björn Illing, Ellen Ariel, Morgan Difalco, Lee F Skerratt, Mark Hamann, Leigh C Ward, Diana Méndez, Suzanne L Munns

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. An experimental approach to assess the combined effects of multiple stressors on a large vertebrate species.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Molecular epidemiology ofMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Serum protein electrophoresis in European mink (The veterinary quarterly · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Sara KophamelCollege of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5200-0107
Björn IllingARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5217-805X
Ellen ArielCollege of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3171-1679
Morgan DifalcoSchool of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, Wales, UK.
Lee F SkerrattFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3471-7512
Mark HamannCollege of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4588-7955
Leigh C WardSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2378-279X
Diana MéndezAustralian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Suzanne L MunnsCollege of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5688-4680

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft IL 220/3-1James Cook UniversitySea World Research and Rescue Foundation SWR/6/2019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildlife health assessments help identify populations at risk of starvation, disease, and decline from anthropogenic impacts on natural habitats. We conducted an overview of available health assessment studies in noncaptive vertebrates and devised a framework to strategically integrate health assessments in population monitoring. Using a systematic approach, we performed a thorough assessment of studies examining multiple health parameters of noncaptive vertebrate species from 1982 to 2020 (n = 261 studies). We quantified trends in study design and diagnostic methods across taxa with generalized linear models, bibliometric analyses, and visual representations of study location versus biodiversity hotspots. Only 35% of studies involved international or cross-border collaboration. Countries with both high and threatened biodiversity were greatly underrepresented. Species that were not listed as threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List represented 49% of assessed species, a trend likely associated with the regional focus of most studies. We strongly suggest following wildlife health assessment protocols when planning a study and using statistically adequate sample sizes for studies establishing reference ranges. Across all taxa blood analysis (89%), body composition assessments (81%), physical examination (72%), and fecal analyses (24% of studies) were the most common methods. A conceptual framework to improve design and standardize wildlife health assessments includes guidelines on the experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and species conservation planning and management implications. Integrating a physiological and ecological understanding of species resilience toward threatening processes will enable informed decision making regarding the conservation of threatened species.

Indexed as

Animals, WildConservation of Natural ResourcesAnimalsBiodiversityEcosystemEndangered Speciesbiodiversity hotspotsconceptual frameworkdiagnostic techniqueshotspots de biodiversidadlistas rojasmarco conceptualred listsrevisión sistemáticasample sizesystematic reviewtamaño muestraltécnicas diagnósticasvertebradosvertebrates样本量概念框架生物多样性热点系统综述红色名录脊椎动物诊断技术

Identifiers

PMID33634525
PMCPMC9291856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.