ArticleScientific reports2022
Increased shark bite survivability revealed by two centuries of Australian records.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The perceived and real threat of shark bites have significant direct health and indirect economic impacts. Here we assess the changing odds of surviving an unprovoked shark bite using 200 years of Australian records. Bite survivability rates for bull (Carcharhinus leucas), tiger (Galeocerdo cuvier) and white (Carcharodon carcharias) sharks were assessed relative to environmental and anthropogenic factors. Survivability of unprovoked bull, tiger and white shark bites were 62, 75 and 53% respectively. Bull shark survivability increased over time between 1807 and 2018. Survivability decreased for both tiger and white sharks when the person was doing an in water activity, such as swimming or diving. Not unsurprisingly, a watercraft for protection/floatation increased survivability to 92% from 30%, and 88% from 45%, for tiger and white sharks respectively. We speculate that survival may be related to time between injury and treatment, indicating the importance of rapid and appropriate medical care. Understanding the predictors of unprovoked bites, as well as survivability (year and water activity), may be useful for developing strategies that reduce the number of serious or fatal human-shark interactions without impacting sharks and other marine wildlife.
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.