Search

There has been a discussion in the last decades about a perceived lack of scientific evidence use in conservation practice, affecting its legitimacy and efficiency. Some researchers argue that peer-reviewed science is rarely used in conservation practice. Others argue that more engagement with different evidence types is needed to make informed decisions, especially local ecological knowledge (LEK). However, little is known about the types of evidence that conservation practitioners use in their decision-making, nor what they think about their usability and accessibility. This study uses a grounded theory approach to explore this issue by conducting semi-structured interviews with eight NGO practitioners engaged in community-based conservation, asking questions about what they consider evidence and how they engage with different types of knowledge. The results show that conservation practitioners engage with a wide range of evidence types, such as peer-reviewed science, LEK but also expert opinion, grey literature, and NGO-generated data. The popularity of expert opinion and LEK suggests that locally sourced knowledge, regardless of whether it is peer-reviewed science, LEK or another knowledge type, is especially valued by practitioners. Participants value peer-reviewed evidence but criticize its availability and accessibility, mainly focusing on a lack of relevant research, paywalled content, and use of inaccessible language by scientists. Some practitioners working in developed areas do not feel the need to engage more with science, suggesting that a degree of “evidence saturation” is happening in developed countries. All participants value LEK, many considering it at least equally important to scientific knowledge, and want it to be more valued and respected in conservation practice. These results suggest that practitioners use a wide range of evidence types which should be held into account by academics and NGOs who wish to improve conservation outcomes. NGOs co

Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is linked with several neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders, either as a comorbid condition or as a risk factor. We aimed to expand the evidence by examining associations with a broad range of brain disorders (psychiatric and neurological disorders, excluding late-onset neurodegenerative disorders), while also accounting for the temporal order of T2DM and these brain disorders. Methods In a population-based cohort-study of 1,883,198 Danish citizens, born 1955-1984 and followed until end of 2016, we estimated associations between T2DM and 16 brain disorders first diagnosed between childhood and mid-adulthood. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in temporally ordered analyses (brain disorder diagnosis after T2DM and vice versa), adjusted for sex, age, follow-up, birth year, and parental factors. Results A total of 67,660 (3.6%) of the study population were identified as T2DM cases after age 30 and by a mean age of 45 years (SD of 8 years). T2DM was associated with most psychiatric disorders. Strongest associations were seen with other (i.e. non-anorectic) eating disorders (OR [95% CI]: 2.64 [2.36-2.94]) and schizophrenia spectrum disorder (2.73 [2.63-2.84]). Among neurological disorders especially inflammatory brain diseases (1.73 [1.57-1.91]) and epilepsy (1.67 [1.60-1.75]) were associated with T2DM. Most associations remained in both directions in the temporally ordered analyses. For most psychiatric disorders, associations were strongest in females. Conclusions T2DM was associated with several psychiatric and neurological disorders, and most associations were consistently found for both temporal order of disorders. This suggests a shared etiology of T2DM and those bra