The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effectiveness in Conservation Practice: Pointers from Medicine and Public Health
Open accessAbstract
Abstract: Practical conservation activity is increasing globally and is being undertaken by many different government and nongovernmental organizations. In the majority of cases, justification for proposed actions is experience-based rather than evidence-based, action is often taken without monitoring or evaluation of effectiveness, and results are rarely widely disseminated. Conservation has been compared with medicine as a crisis discipline in which action is often required urgently in the absence of good information. The practice of medicine has recently gone through an effectiveness revolution that has improved the criteria upon which treatment strategies are based by progressing from reliance on personal experience to reliance on scientific evidence. We draw parallels between medicine and conservation and present a practical framework to encourage evidence-based conservation action. Our rationale is that conservation actions for which scarce resources are sought should be justified by good scientific evidence. In our view this will also encourage more research addressing practical issues in conservation management.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Disturbance, Diversity, and Invasion: Implications for Conservation
Hobbs, R. J., & Huenneke, L. F. (1992) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.06030324.x · Cited by 2,402
Translocation as a Species Conservation Tool: Status and Strategy
Griffith, B., Scott, J. M., Carpenter, J. W., & Reed, C. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.245.4917.477 · Cited by 1,912
Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services
(1973) · Public Health · doi:10.1016/s0033-3506(73)80082-4 · Cited by 1,912
HABITAT LOSS AND POPULATION DECLINE: A META-ANALYSIS OF THE PATCH SIZE EFFECT
Bender, D. J., Contreras, T. A., & Fahrig, L. (1998) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[0517:hlapda]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 868
(1992) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/0006-3207(92)91063-x · Cited by 467
The relationships of plant and insect diversities in succession
SOUTHWOOD, T. R. E., BROWN, V. K., & READER, P. M. (1979) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1979.tb00063.x · Cited by 438
Population viability analyses in plants: challenges and opportunities
Menges, E. S. (2000) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(99)01763-2 · Cited by 413
A Meta‐Analysis of Forest Cover, Edge Effects, and Artificial Nest Predation Rates
Hartley, M. J., & Hunter, M. L. (1998) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.96373.x · Cited by 196
Wildlife Population Assessment: Past Developments and Future Directions
Buckland, S. T., Goudie, I. B. J., & Borchers, D. L. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00001.x · Cited by 190
Collins, R., Gray, R., Godwin, J., & Peto, R. (1987) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780060308 · Cited by 178
Cited by
A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments
Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L. M., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-456 · Cited by 1,993
“Systematic review methodology is widely employed in medicine and public health [21,22], and more recently within environmental management [ 23 ,24], as a way of synthesising the evidence from research for the effectiveness of particular interventions.”
MethodSelf-citationThe need for evidence-based conservation
Sutherland, W. J., Pullin, A. S., Dolman, P. M., & Knight, T. M. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018 · Cited by 1,822
Self-citationMoney for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments
Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105 · Cited by 1,312
Guidelines for systematic review in Conservation and environmental management
PULLIN, A. S., & STEWART, G. B. (2006) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x · Cited by 1,137
Self-citationIntegrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management
Raymond, C. M., Fazey, I., Reed, M. S., Stringer, L. C., Robinson, G. M., & Evely, A. C. (2010) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.03.023 · Cited by 1,116
Metadata
- Authors
- Pullin, A. S., & Knight, T. M.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-02
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-54
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2132830638
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 25.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effectiveness in Conservation Practice: Pointers from Medicine and Public Health. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.99499.x
- The paper
- Pullin, A. S., & Knight, T. M. (2001). Effectiveness in Conservation Practice: Pointers from Medicine and Public Health. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.99499.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
