Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39381717›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in ecology and evolution2024

Eco-decisional well-being networks as a tool for community decision support.

R S Fulford, E Paulukonis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

R S FulfordOffice of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Breeze, FL, United States.
E PaulukonisOffice of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Community decision making based on the sustainability of ecosystem services is an integrated process that involves multiple complex decisions and is greatly aided by an understanding of how those decisions are interrelated. The interrelatedness of decisions can be understood and even measured based on connections between actions and services and influence of services on domains of human well-being. These connections can be formed into a network structure so that quantifiable properties of networks can be applied to understanding decision impacts. We developed an eco-decisional network based on weighted social-ecological networks as a tool for integrated decision making based on ecosystem services and human well-being. Nodes are actions, services, or domains of human well-being and they are linked by weighted influence derived from community stakeholder input. Examination of the eco-decisional network, as well as comparison to pattern in the random networks, suggest there are important patterns of influence among different influence pathways from actions to community well-being, which describe community priorities and define unique roles through which chosen sets of actions can influence human well-being. The eco-decisional network is generalized across communities but can also be made community specific, which provides a tool for comparison between communities in decisional priorities (network properties), as well as comparisons between proposed actions within a community (network paths). The well-studied properties of networks, well-established network theory, as well as established network metrics make this approach promising for application to integrated decision making and for communicating possible outcomes to stakeholders. The result is a guidance tool for connecting propose actions to ecosystem services and human well-being.

Indexed as

community decision makingecosystem serviceshuman well-beingnetwork indicesnetworks

Identifiers

PMID39381717
PMCPMC11457163

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.