Information retrieval for ecological syntheses

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 136-148

  Baylissa, Helen R ^a,b   Beyer, Fiona R ^c  

^a HARPER ADAMS UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Data retrieval; Ecology; Literature review; Literature search; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

DATA MINING; ECOLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; LITERATURE; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

DATA ACCURACY; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DATA MINING; ECOLOGY; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84938687895     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1120     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Booth A. 2004. Formulating answerable questions. In Evidence-based practice: an information professional's handbook, Booth A, Brice A (eds.). Facet: London, 61-70.
2. Booth A. 2006a. "Brimful of STARLITE": towards standards for reporting literature searches. Journal of the Medical Library Association 94: 421-429.
3. Booth A. 2006b. Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library Hi Tech 24: 355-368.
4. Booth A. 2008. Unpacking your literature search toolbox: on search styles and tactics. Health Information and Libraries Journal 25: 313-317.
5. Booth A, Papaioannou D, Sutton A. 2012. Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. Sage, 288 pp.
6. Budden AE, Tregenza T, Aarssen LW, Koricheva J, Leimu R, Lortie CJ. 2008. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23: 4-6.
7. Bussell J, Jones DL, Healey JR, Pullin AS. 2010. How do draining and re-wetting affect carbon stores and greenhouse gas fluxes in peatland soils? Systematic Review CEE-08-012. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: www.environmentalevidence.org/SR49.html.
8. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. University of York: York; 2009.
9. Chalmers TC. 1975. Effects of ascorbic acid on the common cold. An evaluation of the evidence. American Journal of Medicine 58: 532-536.
10. Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. 2002. A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation & the Health Professions 25: 12-37.
11. Cochrane AL. 1972. Effectiveness and Efficiency. Random Reflections on Health Services. Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust: London.
12. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. 2013. Guidelines for systematic review and evidence synthesis in environmental management. Version 4.2. Environmental Evidence: www.environmentalevidence.org/ Documents/Guidelines/Guidelines4.2.pdf
13. DeLuca JB, Mullins MM, Lyles CM, Crepaz N, Kay L, Thadiparthi S. 2008. Developing a comprehensive search strategy for evidence based systematic reviews. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 3: 3-32.
14. Gates S. 2002. Review of methodology of quantitative reviews using meta-analysis in ecology. Journal of Animal Ecology 71: 547-557.
15. Glanville JM, Lefebvre C, Miles JN, Camosso-Stefinovic J. 2006. How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on. Journal of the Medical Library Association 94: 130.
16. Glass GV. 1976. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher 5: 3-8.
17. Gotzsche PC. 1987. Reference bias in reports of drug trials. British Medical Journal 295: 654-656.
18. Gurevitch J, Hedges LV. 1999. Statistical issues in conducting ecological meta-analyses. Ecology 80: 1142-1149.
19. Gurevitch J, Curtis PS, Jones MH. 2001. Meta-analysis in ecology. Advances in Ecological Research 32: 199-247.
20. Jennions MD, Møller AP. 2002. Publication bias in ecology and evolution: an empirical assessment using the 'trim and fill' method. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 77: 211-222.
21. Kabat TJ, Stewart GB, Pullin AS. 2006. Are Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) control and eradication interventions effective? Systematic Review No. 21. Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation. Available from http://www.environmentalevidence.org/SR21.html
22. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
23. Leimu R, Koricheva J. 2004. Cumulative meta-analysis: a new tool for detection of temporal trends and publication bias in ecology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 271: 1961-1966.
24. Leimu R, Lortie CJ, Aarssen LW, Budden AE, Koricheva J, Tregenza T. 2008. Does it pay to have a 'bigwig' as a coauthor? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6: 410-411.
25. Lortie CJ, Aarssen LW, Budden AE, Koricheva JK, Leimu R, Tregenza T. 2007. Publication bias and merit in ecology. Oikos 116: 1247-1253.
26. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine 151: 264-269.
27. Mulrow CD. 1987. The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of Internal Medicine 106: 485-8.
28. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. 1993. The science of reviewing research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 703: 125-133.
29. Petticrew M. 2001. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. British Medical Journal 322: 98.
30. Pratt TC. 2010. Meta-analysis in criminal justice and criminology: what it is, when it's useful, and what to watch out for. Journal of Criminal Justice Education 21: 152-168.
31. Pullin AS, Salafsky N. 2010. Save the whales? Save the rainforest? Save the data! Conservation Biology 24: 915-917.
32. Pullin AS, Stewart GB. 2006. Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology 20: 1647-1656.
33. Randall NP, James KL. 2012. The effectiveness of integrated farm management, organic farming and agrienvironment schemes as interventions for conserving farmland biodiversity-a systematic map. Environmental Evidence 1: 4.
34. Ravnskov U. 1992. Cholesterol lowering trials in coronary heart disease: frequency of citation and outcome. British Medical Journal 305: 9-15.
35. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. 2010. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Medicine 8: 18.
36. Smith ML, Glass GV. 1977. Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist 32: 752-760.
37. Stewart GB. 2010. Meta-analysis in applied ecology. Biology Letters 6: 78-81.
38. Stewart GB, Coles CF, Pullin AS. 2005. Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: Lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects. Biological Conservation 126: 270-278.
39. Stewart GB, Kaiser MJ, Côté IM, Halpern BS, Lester SE, Bayliss HR, Pullin AS. 2009. Temperate marine reserves: global ecological effects and guidelines for future networks. Conservation Letters 2: 243-253.
40. Sutherland WJ, Armstrong D, Butchart SHM, Earnhardt JM, Ewen J, Jamieson I, Jones CG, Lee R, Newbery P, Nichols JD, Parker KA, Sarrazin F, Seddon PJ, Shah N, Tatayah V. 2010. Standards for documenting and monitoring bird reintroduction projects. Conservation Letters 3: 229-235.
41. Sutherland WJ, Mitchell R, Walsh J, Amano T, Ausden M, Beebee TJC, Bullock D, Daniels M, Deutsch J, Griffiths RA, Prior SV, Whitten T, Dicks LV. 2013. Conservation practice could benefit from routine testing and publication of management outcomes. Conservation Evidence 10: 1-3.
42. Thomson D, Russell K, Becker L, Klassen T, Hartling L. 2010. The evolution of a new publication type: Steps and challenges of producing overviews of reviews. Research Synthesis Methods 1: 198-211.
43. Tramer MR, Reynolds DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. 1997. Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study. British Medical Journal 315: 635-640.
44. Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P. 2003. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management 14: 207-222.