Evidence Synthesis International (ESI): Position Statement

Gough, David; Davies, Phil; Jamtvedt, Gro; Langlois, Étienne V; Littell, Julia H.; Lotfi, Tamara; Masset, Edoardo; Merlin, Tracy; Pullin, Andrew S.; Ritskes‐Hoitinga, Merel; Røttingen, John-Arne; Sena, Emily; Stewart, Ruth; Tovey, David; White, Howard; Yost, Jennifer; Lund, Hans; Grimshaw, Jeremy

doi:10.1186/s13643-020-01415-5

Cited by 52 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…. in all areas of human enterprise” (Gough, Davies, et al, 2019, p. 1). Participating RSIs include Cochrane, Campbell, and EPPI-Centre, advancing a multimethodological orientation to systematic reviews.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Synthesis Infrastructures: Shaping Knowledge in Education

Hammond

Moss

Huynh

et al. 2020

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research syntheses provide one means of managing the proliferation of research knowledge by integrating learnings across primary research studies. What it means to appropriately synthesize research, however, remains a matter of debate: Syntheses can assume a variety of forms, each with important implications for the shape knowledge takes and the interests it serves. To help shed light on these differences and their stakes, this chapter provides a critical comparative review of six research synthesis infrastructures, entities that support research syntheses through investments they make in synthesis production and/or publication—enabling (and constraining) the ways knowledge takes shape. Identifying our critical cases through purposive selection, we examined research synthesis infrastructure variations with respect to four different kinds of investments they make: in the genres of synthesis they support, in their promotion of synthesis quality, in sponsoring stakeholder engagement, and in creating the conditions for collective work. We draw on this comparison to suggest some of the potential changes and challenges in store for education researchers in future years.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Synthesis Infrastructures: Shaping Knowledge in Education

Hammond

Moss

Huynh

et al. 2020

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The search identified a total of 1001 articles (Supplemental material 1). Article titles and abstracts were screened to retain studies that potentially included freshwater turtles and dams [Fig.1 (Gough et al, 2020)]. The full text of 101 articles that passed screening was then read and articles were assessed based on two criteria: 1) the study had to include data on at least one freshwater turtle species; 2) the study evaluated current- or post-construction impacts and/or mitigation actions of dams (including removal).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of dams on freshwater turtles: a global review to identify conservation solutions

Bárcenas-García

Michalski

Morgan

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dams create many impacts on freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. Freshwater turtles are at direct and indirect risk due to changes caused by damming including the loss of terrestrial and aquatic nesting and feeding habitats, changes to resource availability and reduced dispersal. We reviewed the global scientific literature that evaluated the impact of dams on freshwater turtles, and carried out additional searches of literature published in seventeen languages for studies evaluating actions to mitigate the impact of dams. The search produced 43 published articles documenting dam impacts on 29 freshwater turtle species from seven families (Chelidae, Chelydridae, Emydidae, Geoemydidae, Kinosternidae, Podocnemididae and Trionychidae) in 13 countries. More than a third of studies (41.9%, n = 18) focused on nine North American species of the Emydidae. Few studies were found from Europe and Asia and none from Africa. The number of studies, life-history stage studied and threat status differed significantly between temperate and tropical latitudes. Most studies were from temperate latitudes, where studies focused more on adults and less threatened species compared with tropical latitudes. Studies evaluated dam impacts as barriers and changes to water flow and quality, but no studies were found that assessed turtles and changes to land cover or mercury caused by dams. More than half of the studies (59%, n = 24) suggested actions to help mitigate dam impacts. Yet, only four studies on three temperate and one tropical species documented the effect of interventions (dam removal, flow management, artificial pond maintenance and community-based action). These findings demonstrate a lack of documented evidence evaluating dam impacts on freshwater turtles particularly in tropical regions. This lack of evidence reinforces the importance of strengthening and maintaining robust long-term studies of freshwater turtles needed to develop effective conservation actions for this group of vertebrates.

show abstract

“…The methods of review tend to reflect the research paradigms and logic of the research methods of the primary studies addressing the same type of research questions. There is therefore a wide range of methods of systematic review methods including statistical meta-analysis of experimental data, theory-driven reviews of causal processes, meta-ethnography, and multicomponent mixed-methods reviews (Gough, Davies, et al, 2020; Gough et al, 2017; Gough et al, 2019).…”

Section: The Basis For the Evidence Claimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraising Evidence Claims

Gough

2021

Review of Research in Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For research evidence to inform decision making, an appraisal needs to be made of whether the claims are justified and whether they are useful to the decisions being made. This chapter provides a high level framework of core issues relevant to appraising the “fitness for purpose” of evidence claims. The framework includes (I) the variation in the nature of research, the evidence claims it produces, and in the values, perspectives, and ethical issues that underlie it; (II) the main components of the bases of evidence claims in terms of (i) how relevant evidence has been identified and synthesized to make a claim, (ii) the technical quality and relevance of the included evidence, and (iii) the totality of evidence to justify the warrant of the evidence claim (including the potential for there to be alternative explanations); (III) evidence standards to appraise evidence claims and examples of guides and tools to assist with aspects of such appraisal; and (IV) engagement with evidence: (i) the communication of evidence claims, (ii) the fitness for purpose of these evidence claims for decision makers, and (iii) and the interpretation of such claims to provide recommendations and guidance.

show abstract

Evidence Synthesis International (ESI): Position Statement

Cited by 52 publications

References 9 publications

Research Synthesis Infrastructures: Shaping Knowledge in Education

Research Synthesis Infrastructures: Shaping Knowledge in Education

Impacts of dams on freshwater turtles: a global review to identify conservation solutions

Appraising Evidence Claims

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About