1. Best practice in research: Consensus Statement on Ethnopharmacological Field Studies – ConSEFS
- Author
-
Gary I. Stafford, Merlin Willcox, Wendy Applequist, Ana Haydee Ladio, Chun Lin Long, Michael Heinrich, Caroline S. Weckerle, Andreas Lardos, Pulok Mukherjee, and Marco Leonti
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Consensus ,Knowledge management ,Best practice ,media_common.quotation_subject ,Otras Ciencias de la Tierra y relacionadas con el Medio Ambiente ,TRADITIONAL MEDICINE ,Alternative medicine ,01 natural sciences ,Field (computer science) ,Ciencias de la Tierra y relacionadas con el Medio Ambiente ,purl.org/becyt/ford/1 [https] ,purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5 [https] ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Drug Discovery ,Field research ,Humans ,Medicine ,Quality (business) ,CONSORT (ADAPTION) ,media_common ,ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL FIELD STUDIES ,Pharmacology ,Statement (computer science) ,Traditional medicine ,business.industry ,Research ,Checklist ,0104 chemical sciences ,Test (assessment) ,010404 medicinal & biomolecular chemistry ,HISTORICAL STUDIES ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Ethnopharmacology ,MEDICINAL PLANTS ,business ,CIENCIAS NATURALES Y EXACTAS - Abstract
Background: Ethnopharmacological research aims at gathering information on local and traditional uses of plants and other natural substances. However, the approaches used and the methods employed vary, and while such a variability is desirable in terms of scientific diversity, research must adhere to well defined quality standards and reproducible methods. Objectives: With ConSEFS (the Consensus Statement on Ethnopharmacological Field Studies) we want to define best-practice in developing, conducting and reporting field studies focusing on local and traditional uses of medicinal and food plants, including studies using a historical approach. Methods: After first developing an initial draft the core group invited community-wide feedback from researchers both through a web-based consultation and a series of workshops at conferences during 2017. Outcomes:The consultation resulted in a large number of responses. Feedback was received via a weblink on the Journal of Ethnopharmacology´s website (ca. 100 responses), other oral and written responses (ca. 50) and discussions with stakeholders at four conferences. The main outcome is a checklist, covering best practice for designing, implementing and recording ethnopharmacological field studies and historical studies. Conclusions: Prior to starting ethnopharmacological field research, it is essential that the authors are fully aware of the best practice in the field. For the first time in the field of ethnopharmacology a community-wide document defines guidelines for best practice on how to conduct and report such studies. It will need to be updated and further developed. While the feedback has been based on responses by many experienced researchers, there is a need to test it in practice by using it both in implementing and reporting field studies (or historical studies), and peer-review. Fil: Heinrich, Michael. University of London; Reino Unido Fil: Lardos, Andreas. No especifíca; Fil: Leonti, Marco. Università Degli Studi Di Cagliari.; Italia Fil: Weckerle, Caroline. Universitat Zurich; Suiza Fil: Willcox, Merlin. University of Southampton; Reino Unido Fil: Applequist, Wendy. Missouri Botanical Garden; Estados Unidos Fil: Ladio, Ana Haydee. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentina Fil: Lin Long, Chun. Minzu University Of China; China Fil: Mukherjee, Pulok. Jadavpur University; India Fil: Stafford, Gary. Stellenbosch University; Sudáfrica
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF