Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38822968›Full record

ArticleAmbio2024

Russian dilemma for global arctic science.

Gareth Rees, Ulf Büntgen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Gareth ReesDepartment of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EN, UK. wgr2@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6020-1232
Ulf BüntgenDepartment of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EN, UK. ub223@cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Czech Science Centre 23-08049SEuropean Research Council 101118880European Research Council 882727
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polar regions are critically implicated in our understanding of global climate change. This is particularly the case for the Arctic, where positive feedback loops and climate tipping points enhance complexity and urgency. Half of the Arctic and much of the world's permafrost zone lie within Russian territory. Heightened geopolitical tensions, however, have severely damaged scientific collaboration between Russia and previously well established academic partners in western countries. Isolation is now causing increasingly large data gaps in arctic research that affect our ability to make accurate predictions of the impact of climate change on natural and societal systems at all scales from local to global. Here, we argue that options to resume both practical knowledge of collaborative working and flows of research data from Russia for global arctic science must continue to be asserted, despite an increasing tendency for the Arctic to become disconnected. Time is short, as preparations for the fifth International Polar Year begin to gather momentum. While sanctions remain in place, efforts to foster peer to peer connections and re-activate effective institutional cooperation are vital to address the grand challenges of global climate change.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeArctic RegionsInternational CooperationRussiaArctic scienceCrisisRussiaScientific collaboration

Identifiers

PMID38822968
PMCPMC11182990

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.