SynthesisNature ecology & evolution2022
Quantifying research waste in ecology.
Synthesis in Nature ecology & evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Too Few, Too Many, or Just Right? Optimizing Sample Sizes for Population-Level Inferences in Animal Tracking Projects.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Only One Percent of Important Shark and Ray Areas in the Western Indian Ocean Are Fully Protected From Fishing Pressure.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Preprint policies across journals and publishers in ecology and evolutionary biology.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- How thoughtful experimental design can empower biologists in the omics era.Nature communications · 2025Review
- Let's DAG in: how directed acyclic graphs can help behavioural ecology be more transparent.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- MacaqueNet: Advancing comparative behavioural research through large-scale collaboration.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
- Poor hypotheses and research waste in biology: learning from a theory crisis in psychology.BMC biology · 2025Review
- How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Visualization toolkits for enriching meta-analyses through evidence maps, bibliometrics, and alternative impact metrics.Research synthesis methods · 2025Review
- Global changes and their environmental stressors have a significant impact on soil biodiversity-A meta-analysis.iScience · 2024Article
- Integrating open education practices with data analysis of open science in an undergraduate course.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Supporting study registration to reduce research waste.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024Review
- Are Open Science instructions targeted to ecologists and evolutionary biologists sufficient? A literature review of guidelines and journal data policies.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Scope and financial impact of unpublished data and unused samples among U.S. academic and government researchers.iScience · 2023Article
- Registered Reports: A new chapter atEcology and evolution · 2023Article
- Opportunities and challenges for Registered Reports in ecology and evolution.Nature communications · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research inefficiencies can generate huge waste: evidence from biomedical research has shown that most research is avoidably wasted and steps have been taken to tackle this costly problem. Although other scientific fields could also benefit from identifying and quantifying waste and acting to reduce it, no other estimates of research waste are available. Given that ecological issues interweave most of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, we argue that tackling research waste in ecology should be prioritized. Our study leads the way. We estimate components of waste in ecological research based on a literature review and a meta-analysis. Shockingly, our results suggest only 11-18% of conducted ecological research reaches its full informative value. All actors within the research system-including academic institutions, policymakers, funders and publishers-have a duty towards science, the environment, study organisms and the public, to urgently act and reduce this considerable yet preventable loss. We discuss potential ways forward and call for two major actions: (1) further research into waste in ecology (and beyond); (2) focused development and implementation of solutions to reduce unused potential of ecological research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35864230What 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.