ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2021
Bridging research and practice in conservation.
Review in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Understanding trends inPeerJ · 2025Pooled it
- Towards evidence-based conservation of subterranean ecosystems.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022Pooled it
- Advancing Marine Mammal Conservation Through Omics Tools and Integration of Indigenous Ecological Knowledge.Molecular ecology · 2026Review
- Challenging 10 misconceptions in conservation physiology.Conservation physiology · 2026Article
- Preprint policies across journals and publishers in ecology and evolutionary biology.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Understanding and predicting animal movements and distributions in the Anthropocene.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Review
- Scientist engagement and the knowledge-action gap.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Review
- Navigating uncertainty in environmental DNA detection of a nuisance marine macroalga.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Aligning data with decisions to address the biodiversity crisis.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Defining Populations and Predicting Future Suitable Niche Space in the Geographically Disjunct, Narrowly Endemic Leafy Prairie-Clover (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Environmental evidence in action: on the science and practice of evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making.Environmental evidence · 2023Article
- Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers.Reviews in fish biology and fisheries · 2023Article
- Standards of conduct and reporting in evidence syntheses that could inform environmental policy and management decisions.Environmental evidence · 2022Article
- Natural Resource Managers Use and Value Western-Based Science, but Barriers to Access Persist.Environmental management · 2022Article
- Bridging research and practice in conservation.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Calls for biodiversity conservation practice to be more evidence based are growing, and we agree evidence use in conservation practice needs improvement. However, evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. In medicine, unlike in conservation, a well-established and well-funded layer of intermediary individuals and organizations engage with medical practitioners, synthesize primary research relevant to decision making, and make evidence easily accessible. These intermediaries prepare targeted evidence summaries and distribute them to practitioners faced with time-sensitive and value-laden decisions. To be effective, these intermediaries, who we refer to as evidence bridges, should identify research topics based on the priorities of practitioners; synthesize evidence; prepare and distribute easy-to-find and easy-to-use evidence summaries; and develop and maintain networks of connections with researchers and practitioners. Based on a review of the literature regarding evidence intermediaries in conservation and environmental management, as well as an anonymous questionnaire searching for such organizations, we found few intermediaries that met all these criteria. Few evidence bridges that do exist are unable to reach most conservation practitioners, which include resource managers in government and industry, conservation organizations, and farmers and other private landowners. We argue that the lack of evidence bridges from research to practitioners contributes to evidence complacency and limits the use of evidence in conservation action. Nevertheless, several existing organizations help reduce the gap between evidence and practice and could serve as a foundation for building additional components of evidence bridges in conservation. Although evidence bridges need expertise in research and evidence synthesis, they also require expertise in identifying and communicating with the community of practitioners most in need of clear and concise syntheses of evidence. Article Impact Statement: Evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. We call for intermediary evidence bridges.
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.