User:Mrl058/Wildlife conservation

Wildlife Conservation

The article refers to the practice and to the protection of wild species, which is the theme of the whole paper. While reading the article, concepts such as scientific integrity and innovation will be applied to determine if the paper is trustworthy or needs to be retracted.


 * 1) Habitat destruction:


 * 1) Would be useful to      implement exact testing for how they determined that humans affect      deforestation, urbanization, etc.


 * 1) When it mentions the      COVID 19 pandemic, what type of human behavior was shifted and how did it      get people to start to utilize green spaces.

The national library of medicine is a good source to use to determine the correct criteria for synthesizing any data. It was stated that, “To be a systematic review, it must include a methods section that describes (1) a search strategy and (2) an appropriate approach to synthesizing the data. For reviews determined to meet the systematic review criteria, assess methodological quality” [1].


 * 1) Pollution:

a.            Again, what test to verify the negative impact of the pollutants mentioned. While they provide a good explanation of what they are, exactly how they affect different species and what species.

b.           Has mentioned good practices for scientific integrity regarding the extinction of species and how to conserve them.

c.           Measures to preserve the leatherback sea turtle represents an ethical approach to reduce damage to the turtle as well as its surrounding.


 * 1) Conservation methods:


 * 1) Monitoring local and      regional ranges will improve the integrity of the page. Multiple surveys      and counts are useful to determine a valid result.

While the majority of the information provided is on a good basis, the BMC has stated a very important message in determining integrity in the article.

“Guidelines for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews (SRs) were developed to contribute to implementing evidence-based health care and the reduction of research waste”, which can be useful to assess whether the evidence given is reliable or not [2].

Lastly, the 3R method is also another useful tip to considered when working on the topic of wildlife conservation.

“Replacement where possible with non-animal methods, Reduction of the number of animals to the minimum which achieves a valid result, and Refinement of the care and use of those animals which must be used, to maximize animal welfare and data quality” [3]. It is important to take into consideration the effects that testing can have on animals and ways to work with them without harming the environment. Taking these precautions will help improve the overall quality of the article.

Sources:

1.      Criteria Used in Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK242394/. Accessed 7 Nov. 2023.

2.      Pussegoda, Kusala, et al. “Systematic Review Adherence to Methodological or Reporting Quality - Systematic Reviews.” BioMed Central, BioMed Central, 19 July 2017, systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-017-0527-2.


 * 1) Smith,     Adrian J. “Guidelines for Planning and Conducting High-Quality Research     and Testing on Animals - Laboratory Animal Research.” BioMed Central,     BioMed Central, 10 July 2020,     labanimres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42826-020-00054-0.

4.      Mignini, Luciano E, and Khalid S Khan. “Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews of Animal Studies: A Survey of Reviews of Basic Research - BMC Medical Research Methodology.” BioMed Central, BioMed Central, 13 Mar. 2006, bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-6-10.