Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34944206›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

What Do They Know? Comparing Public Knowledge and Opinions about Rodent Management to the Expectations of Pest Controllers.

Sara A Burt, Stefan A Lipman

Abstract 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
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

2 authors.

Sara A BurtInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8363-6255
Stefan A LipmanErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8784-9650

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrated pest management (IPM) involves the control of pests, such as rodents, based on preventive measures and reduced use of chemical control. In view of the number of reported rodent infestations, it appears unlikely that the public has much knowledge about rodents. The objectives of this study were (i) to assess the knowledge and opinions of the public regarding prevention and control of rodent nuisance, and (ii) to assess whether pest controllers have an accurate idea of the knowledge and opinions of the public. The sample contained a total of 314 members of the public and 86 people working in the pest control sector. Responding members of the general public were asked about their knowledge and opinions about IPM in a questionnaire, whereas people working in the pest control sector were asked if they thought the general public had this knowledge and/or opinions. The results show that members of the public have a reasonable level of knowledge regarding preventive measures against rodents, which are part of IPM. People working in the pest control sector underestimate the public's knowledge of preventive measures, such as perimeter exclusion and hygiene measures. Such underestimation may affect their communication with (potential) clients.

Indexed as

integrated pest managementIPMknowledgemiceopinionpest controlpest controllersratsrodent

Identifiers

PMID34944206
PMCPMC8698193

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.