An Exploration of Systematic Review Publication Trends in Conservation Biology Journals

Abstract

<jats:p>Researchers in conservation biology and other non-medical fields are adopting systematic review as a research methodology. Since this methodology requires extensive and well-documented literature searching, it is beneficial for information professionals to understand disciplinary developments in its use. This article investigates trends in systematic review publication in conservation biology journals between 1998 and 2017 and examines the prevalence of search reporting among these systematic reviews. Results show an increase in published systematic reviews over the study period, and the majority of these include a description of the literature search. However, evidence of variable search quality and reporting indicates an important role for librarians in improving literature search strategies and documentation.</jats:p>

An Examination of Systematic Reviews in the Engineering Literature

“…Other papers did not share a full search strategy. These poor search methods are consistent with observations from other studies of systematic reviews that found authors only searched one database [8] or used poor quality searches [16], [17] . In particular, "many published systematic reviews have been found to contain errors in the design and conduct of the searches that could affect their quality" [18, p. 2] .…”

“…Two other disciplines we were interested in examining were software engineering and environmental sciences or environmental engineering. These areas are of interest as there is existing research about systematic reviews conservation biology [8] and software engineering [14] . Boice [8] demonstrated that systematic reviews have become more common in conservation biology, so we would predict that related engineering disciplines would also adopt systematic review methodologies.…”

“…These areas are of interest as there is existing research about systematic reviews conservation biology [8] and software engineering [14] . Boice [8] demonstrated that systematic reviews have become more common in conservation biology, so we would predict that related engineering disciplines would also adopt systematic review methodologies. The categories "Engineering, Environmental" and "Environmental Sciences" were applied to ten and nine percent of articles in total, showing that environmental engineering has adopted systematic reviews.…”

“…Riegelman and Kocher [7] found that the number of systematic reviews in CAB abstracts (life sciences) and PsycINFO (psychology) doubled between 2012 and 2016. Boice [8] similarly observed a large upward trend in the number of systematic reviews published in conservation biology journals in the last 20 years. Within the field of library and information studies, the majority of systematic reviews come from health sciences librarianship [9] , and more are conducted in North America than other parts of the world [10] .…”

Do biodiversity monitoring citizen science surveys meet the core principles of open science practices?

“…The key words "citizen science" and "biodiversity monitoring" were used to search Web of Science. This database was chosen due to its common use in systematic reviews, specifically surrounding biodiversity conservation research, and the large number of results generated in the initial search (Boice, 2019). Results were initially filtered to include only journal article submissions before 2022.…”