Trial reportConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026
Exploring legal- and health-risk messaging to reduce demand for elephant skin.
Trial report in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. 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.
- Exploring legal- and health-risk messaging to reduce demand for elephant skin.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) are poached for an illegal trade in their skins, which are used in traditional medicine in Africa and Asia. We explored whether messages about the legal and health risks of using elephant skin for medicinal purposes (stomach illness) could reduce such consumption. We conducted a randomized controlled trial intervention experiment based on a health belief model. We showed 1673 residents at China's Yunnan-Myanmar border comic strips that portrayed these risks (legal-risk and health-risk treatments and control). Respondents were then asked for their perception of benefits and risks of using elephant skin and their consumption intentions for treating stomach illness (i.e., seek elephant skin, seek animal-based traditional medicine, visit informal market, and visit hospitals). We used structural equation models to examine whether and how different messages affect consumption intentions. Compared with the control group (n = 580), the comics that showed the legal risks of use of elephant skin (n = 529) significantly reduced respondents' intentions to seek elephant skin by 24% compared with the control group, particularly when the message conveyed that its use is not a cure. The health-risk treatment (n = 564) increased respondents' intentions to go to the hospital when suffering from stomach illness and, unexpectedly, increased the intention of urban residents who had never heard of elephant skin as a treatment to look for it by 40% compared with those of urban residents in the control group. Our results revealed that interventions tailored to specific audience segments are necessary to prevent unintended, negative consequences of public messaging conservation interventions.
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.