ArticlePloS one2022
How threats inform conservation planning-A systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impacts of bat use of anthropogenic structures on bats and humans.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Pooled it
- Expression of Concern: How threats inform conservation planning-A systematic review protocol.PloS one · 2026Article
- Mapping global land conversion pressure to support conservation planning.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Immigration allows population persistence and maintains genetic diversity despite an attempted experimental extinction.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- How effective are protected areas for reducing threats to biodiversity? A systematic review protocol.Environmental evidence · 2023Review
- How financial mechanisms can incentivize provision of ecosystem services from land restoration: A systematic review protocol.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conservation planning addresses the development and expansion of protected areas and requires data on for instance species, habitats, and biodiversity. Data on threats is often minimal, although necessary in conservation planning. In principle, threats should guide which conservation actions to take and where, and how to allocate resources. The lack of threat information may also limit the validity of areas to be conserved, if the condition of areas is degraded by threats unknown. The protocol described here outlines the methodology for a systematic review to explore how threats are theoretically and methodologically understood and used in conservation plans across freshwater, marine and terrestrial environments. Our primary research question is: how have threats informed conservation planning? Studies will be categorized according to the types of threats and conservation features used, theoretical and methodological approaches applied, geographical context, and biome. The results are expected to increase our understanding about how threats can and should be addressed in conservation planning.
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.