Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34573463›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

Human Decision-Making as a Key Factor in the Risk of Wolf-Dog Interactions during Outdoor Activities.

Andżelika Haidt, Radosław Gawryś, Maciej Szewczyk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andżelika HaidtDepartment of Forest Ecology, Forest Research Institute, Sękocin Stary, 05-090 Raszyn, Poland.
Radosław GawryśDepartment of Forest Ecology, Forest Research Institute, Sękocin Stary, 05-090 Raszyn, Poland.
Maciej SzewczykDepartment of Vertebrate Ecology and Zoology, Faculty of Biology, University of Gdańsk, 80-308 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7424-1120
Instytut Badawczy Leśnictwa · PLUniversity of Gdańsk · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a result of species protection in Poland, wolves now appear in places that are attractive for human recreation, increasing their exposure to dogs. This creates a risk of spontaneous direct interactions between these two canine species. Aggressive interactions between the gray wolf and the domestic dog lead to human-large predator conflicts. This study examined wolf-dog interactions using data collected in an online questionnaire and included questions related to factors that might influence the likelihood of interactions between these canines. One of the most important factors affecting the likelihood of interaction between a dog and a wolf was the distance between the dog and the human. The number of wolves was also important-the more wolves, the more likely they were to interact with dogs. The risk of interaction also significantly increases with decreasing distance to human settlements. There were also statistical differences in terms of the type of outdoor activity being engaged in. Hunting was seven times more likely to result in a wolf-dog interaction than normal walk. We postulate that the choices made by the human (dog control and type of recreation) caring for the dog are an important factor that can reduce the risk of direct contact between dogs and wolves.

Indexed as

behavioral ecologyCanis lupusdomestic doghuman wildlife conflictinterspecies interactions

Identifiers

PMID34573463
PMCPMC8470882
OpenAlexW3193722310

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.