Test environment running 7.6.6

Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Maximizing the value of systematic reviews in ecology when data or resources are limited

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Doerr, Erik D.
Dorrough, Josh
Davies, Micah J.
Doerr, Veronica A. J.
McIntyre, Sue

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Wiley

Abstract

Systematic reviews provide a rigorous, repeatable and quantitative method for assessing and synthesizing all available empirical evidence to evaluate a specific research, management, or policy question. They are particularly well suited for evaluating the effectiveness of environmental management actions, and thus for underpinning evidence-based adaptive natural resource management. However, their current utility may be limited in countries like Australia, where both the amount of research relative to land area and of well-monitored, active land management for environmental purposes are relatively low. Based on our experience conducting two of the first ecological systematic reviews in Australia, we have developed a number of recommendations for conducting systematic reviews in situations where resources and/or primary research data are limited. We discuss potential modification or augmentation of most aspects of the systematic review process including selection of a review team, question formulation, search strategy, data analysis, and the communication of results, as well as the inherent tradeoffs between systematic thoroughness and available resources that are involved in these changes. We hope that our recommendations will encourage more ecologists to undertake systematic reviews even if primary research and resources to conduct the review appear to be limited, as even a modified systematic review can provide more defensible evidence-based guidelines for management of natural resources.

Description

Citation

Source

Austral Ecology

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until