Reducing publication delay to improve the efficiency and impact of conservation science

PeerJ

article

Alec P. Christie¹  Thomas B. White¹  Philip A. Martin¹  Silviu O. Petrovan¹  Andrew J. Bladon¹  Andrew E. Bowkett³  Nick A. Littlewood¹  Anne-Christine Mupepele⁵  Ricardo Rocha¹  Katherine A. Sainsbury⁸  Rebecca K. Smith¹  Nigel G. Taylor⁹  William J. Sutherland¹ 

[1] Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge;BioRISC, St Catherine’s College;Wild Planet Trust;Scotland’s Rural College;Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg;Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources, Institute of Agronomy, University of Lisbon;Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources, University of Porto;Faculty of Kinesiology, Sport, and Recreation, University of Alberta;Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands

关键词: Publication delay;    Peer-review;    Conservation science;    Conservation evidence;    Evidence-based;    Science-policy gap;    Science-practice gap;    Journal delay;    Publication speed;   

DOI  :  10.7717/peerj.12245

学科分类：社会科学、人文和艺术（综合）

来源: Inra

【 摘 要 】

Evidence-based decision-making is most effective with comprehensive access to scientific studies. If studies face significant publication delays or barriers, the useful information they contain may not reach decision-makers in a timely manner. This represents a potential problem for mission-oriented disciplines where access to the latest data is required to ensure effective actions are undertaken. We sought to analyse the severity of publication delay in conservation science—a field that requires urgent action to prevent the loss of biodiversity. We used the Conservation Evidence database to assess the length of publication delay (time from finishing data collection to publication) in the literature that tests the effectiveness of conservation interventions. From 7,447 peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed studies of conservation interventions published over eleven decades, we find that the raw mean publication delay was 3.2 years (±2SD = 0.1) and varied by conservation subject. A significantly shorter delay was observed for studies focused on Bee Conservation, Sustainable Aquaculture, Management of Captive Animals, Amphibian Conservation, and Control of Freshwater Invasive Species (Estimated Marginal Mean range from 1.4–1.9 years). Publication delay was significantly shorter for the non-peer-reviewed literature (Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 1.9 years ± 0.2) compared to the peer-reviewed literature (i.e., scientific journals; Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 3.0 years ± 0.1). We found publication delay has significantly increased over time (an increase of ~1.2 years from 1912 (1.4 years ± 0.2) to 2020 (2.6 years ± 0.1)), but this change was much weaker and non-significant post-2000s; we found no evidence for any decline. There was also no evidence that studies on more threatened species were subject to a shorter delay—indeed, the contrary was true for mammals, and to a lesser extent for birds. We suggest a range of possible ways in which scientists, funders, publishers, and practitioners can work together to reduce delays at each stage of the publication process.

【 授权许可】

CC BY