Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34564206›Full record

ArticleInsects2021

Data Reliability in a Citizen Science Protocol for Monitoring Stingless Bees Flight Activity.

Jailson N Leocadio, Natalia P Ghilardi-Lopes, Sheina Koffler, Celso Barbiéri, Tiago M Francoy, Bruno Albertini, Antonio M Saraiva

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

7 authors.

Jailson N LeocadioEscola Politécnica, University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto 158, Tv. 3, São Paulo 05508-010, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7104-7207
Natalia P Ghilardi-LopesCentro de Ciências Naturais e Humanas, Federal University of ABC, R. Arcturus 3, São Bernardo do Campo 09606-070, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-6213-8871
Sheina KofflerInstituto de Estudos Avançados, University of São Paulo, R. Praça do Relógio 109, São Paulo 05508-970, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1126-8999
Celso BarbiériEscola de Artes, Ciências e Humanidades, University of São Paulo, R. Arlindo Bettio 1000, São Paulo 03828-000, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7790-1371
Tiago M FrancoyEscola de Artes, Ciências e Humanidades, University of São Paulo, R. Arlindo Bettio 1000, São Paulo 03828-000, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2413-966X
Bruno AlbertiniEscola Politécnica, University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto 158, Tv. 3, São Paulo 05508-010, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3738-6448
Antonio M SaraivaEscola Politécnica, University of São Paulo, Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto 158, Tv. 3, São Paulo 05508-010, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2283-1123

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 312.605/2018-8Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88882.333367/2019-01Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88882.377160/2019-01Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2018/14994-1Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2019/26760-8
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the quality of citizen science (CS) data is often a concern, evidence for high-quality CS data increases in the scientific literature. This study aimed to assess the data reliability of a structured CS protocol for monitoring stingless bees' flight activity. We tested (1) data accuracy for replication among volunteers and for expert validation and (2) precision, comparing dispersion between citizen scientists and expert data. Two distinct activity dimensions were considered: (a) perception of flight activity and (b) flight activity counts (entrances, exits, and pollen load). No significant differences were found among groups regarding entrances and exits. However, replicator citizen scientists presented a higher chance of perceiving pollen than original data collectors and experts, likely a false positive. For those videos in which there was an agreement about pollen presence, the effective pollen counts were similar (with higher dispersion for citizen scientists), indicating the reliability of CS-collected data. The quality of the videos, a potential source of variance, did not influence the results. Increasing practical training could be an alternative to improve pollen data quality. Our study shows that CS provides reliable data for monitoring bee activity and highlights the relevance of a multi-dimensional approach for assessing CS data quality.

Indexed as

biodiversity monitoringdata qualitymeliponiniprotocol validationvolunteer participation

Identifiers

PMID34564206
PMCPMC8467663

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.