Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40693135›Full record

ReviewAnimal welfare (South Mimms, England)2025

Rapid systematic literature review: Camera trap sampling in ecological studies: Considerations of wildlife welfare.

Emeline Nogues, Ava Arends, Marina A G von Keyserlingk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal welfare (South Mimms, England), 2025. 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

3 authors.

Emeline NoguesAnimal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, The University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6040-5833
Ava ArendsAnimal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, The University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9473-6578
Marina A G von KeyserlingkAnimal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, The University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1427-3152

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of camera traps in wildlife conservation and ecological research is a popular method of data capture due in large part to the perceived low interference levels for the animals being studied. However, evidence exists that some species alter their behaviour when exposed to this technology. The primary aim of this study was to address whether researchers working with this technology in the ecology and forestry fields are making considerations for the possible impacts of cameras on animal behaviour. A secondary aim was to investigate how the use of this technology is framed in recent publications. In this rapid systematic literature review, we conducted a search on Web of Science and we identified 267 papers published in the last five years, in the fields of ecology and forestry, that met our inclusion criteria. We screened the studies for mentions of the impact of camera traps on the welfare of wildlife. Surprisingly, only 7.5% of the papers considered the possible animal welfare impacts of camera use on the wildlife species of interest in their study, with most comparing it to invasive methods and therefore framing this technology positively. We strongly encourage researchers working in this field to consider the impact of this technology on the specific species being studied. Whilst we recognise that the use of camera traps avoids direct handling of the animals, the short- and long-term effects of using this technology should not be ignored and should, at a minimum, be acknowledged in the limitations.

Indexed as

Animal welfarebehaviourconservation scienceecologyethicswild animals

Identifiers

PMID40693135
PMCPMC12277094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.