Review of methodology of quantitative reviews using meta‐analysis in ecology

Gates, Simon

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00634.x

Cited by 215 publications

(222 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

220

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Formal study inclusion criteria have been proposed and discussed extensively for meta-analysis due to its quantitative nature relative to narrative reviews (Moher et al 1995;Moher et al 1996) and for ecology Gates 2002). The primary purpose of inclusion criteria is to ensure that the patterns detected within a meta-analysis are representative of the ecological processes.…”

Section: Literature and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

How to critically read ecological meta-analyses.

Lortie

Stewart

Rothstein

et al. 2013

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meta-analysis offers ecologists a powerful tool for knowledge synthesis. Albeit a form of review, it also shares many similarities with primary empirical research. Consequently, critical reading of meta-analyses incorporates criteria from both sets of approaches particularly because ecology is a discipline that embraces heterogeneity and broad methodologies. The most important issues in critically assessing a meta-analysis initially include transparency, replicability, and clear statement of purpose by the authors. Specific to ecology more so than other disciplines, tests of the same hypothesis are generally conducted at different study sites, have variable ecological contexts (i.e., seasonality), and use very different methods. Clear reporting and careful examination of heterogeneity in ecological meta-analyses is thus crucial.Ecologists often also test similar hypotheses with different species, and in these meta-analyses, the reader should expect exploration of phylogenetic dependencies. Finally, observational studies not only provide the substrate for potential current manipulative experiments in this discipline but also form an important body of literature historically for synthesis. Sensitivity analyses of observational versus manipulative experiments when aggregated in the same ecological meta-analysis are also frequent and appropriate. This brief conceptual review is not intended as an instrument to rate meta-analyses for ecologists but does provide the appropriate framing for those purposes and directs the reader to ongoing developments in this direction in other disciplines.

show abstract

Section: Literature and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

How to critically read ecological meta-analyses.

Lortie

Stewart

Rothstein

et al. 2013

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first element, internal validity, relates to whether a study answers its research question using methods that are free from bias (Gates 2002;Juni et al 1999;Treadwell et al 2007). A quality assessment of internal validity might consider the experimental design or sampling accuracy of a study (Text box 1).…”

Section: General Guidelines For the Interpretation Of Meta-analyses Imentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Formal study inclusion criteria have been proposed and discussed extensively for meta-analysis due to its quantitative nature relative to reviews (Moher et al 1995;Moher et al 1996) and for ecology (Gates 2002). The primary purpose of inclusion criteria is to both determine whether the strength of evidence within the meta-analysis is generalizable to a broader set of studies and to ensure that the analyses are repeatable.…”

Section: Philosophical Considerations In the Interpretation Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This does not necessarily lead to the exclusion of 'low-quality' ecological studies. Using several sets of guidelines (Gates 2002;Pullin and Stewart 2006;Treadwell et al 2007), we propose that ecological meta-analyses should consider specific criteria for effective interpretation of the evidence used in the metaanalysis (Text Box 2).…”

Section: Philosophical Considerations In the Interpretation Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paradigm shift is not a new idea in evidence-based medicine (Higgins and Green 2006) nor in ecology (Arnquist and Wooster 1995;Gurevitch and Hedges 1993;Gurevitch et al 1992), but the reviews in ecology are shifting from narrative descriptions to systematic reviews (Pullin and Stewart 2006), and meta-analysis is an excellent quantitative means to synthesize broad trends (Gates 2002). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Practical interpretation of ecological meta-analyses

Lortie

Stewart

Rothstein

et al. 2013

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meta-analysis offers ecologists a powerful tool for knowledge synthesis. There is however obvious and subtle issues to consider specific to ecology with respect to the appropriate interpretation of meta-analyses once the statistics are completed. Meta-analysts in any field must clearly define a priori the scope of inference and the purpose of the meta-analysis, but ecological meta-analysis often faces issues particular to this field. For example, the primary studies being combined, even for tests of the same hypothesis, in ecology are generally conducted at different study sites or have difference ecological contexts (i.e. often few studies are not conducted in a laboratory) and use very different methods to test a single hypothesis. General objectives of the meta-analysis could include assessment of confidence limits of the treatment or ecological process of interest, detection of differences in treatments from no effect, identification of research gaps, and differences between groups such as different populations or communities.Meta-analyses can also be used in ecology to assess whether the scope of tests of a hypothesis are adequate. Reporting more than one summary statistic such as different effect size metrics is an excellent means to enhance synthetic potential for ecologists. Magnitude and sign of effect sizes can also be interpreted in novel ways for ecology given the broad scope of forms of hypotheses explored in this discipline. Ecology is now poised to take advantage of the synthesis developments common in other disciplines and this brief conceptual methods review provides the appropriate framing for this endeavor.

show abstract

Fitness‐related benefits of dominance in primates

Majolo

Lehmann

Vizioli

et al. 2012

American J Phys Anthropol

151

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dominance hierarchies are thought to provide various fitness-related benefits to dominant individuals (e.g., preferential access to food or mating partners). Remarkably, however, different studies on this topic have produced contradictory results, with some showing strong positive association between rank and fitness (i.e., dominants gain benefits over subordinates), others weak associations, and some others even revealing negative associations. Here, we investigate dominance-related benefits across primate species while controlling for phylogenetic effects. We extracted data from 94 published studies, representing 25 primate species (2 lemur species, 4 New World monkeys, 16 Old World monkeys, and 3 apes), to assess how dominance affects life-history and behavior. We used standard and phylogenetic meta-analyses to analyze the benefits of dominance in primates. Dominant females had higher infant survival to first year, although we found no significant effect of dominance on female feeding success. Results for female fecundity differed between the two meta-analytical approaches, with no effect of dominance on female fecundity after controlling for phylogeny. Dominant males had a higher fecundity and mating success than subordinate males. Finally, the benefits of dominance for female fecundity were stronger in species with a longer lifespan. Our study supports the view that dominance hierarchies are a key aspect of primate societies as they indeed provide a number of fitness-related benefits to individuals.

show abstract

Review of methodology of quantitative reviews using meta‐analysis in ecology

Cited by 215 publications

References 76 publications

How to critically read ecological meta-analyses.

How to critically read ecological meta-analyses.

Practical interpretation of ecological meta-analyses

Fitness‐related benefits of dominance in primates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About