Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Repeatability of the searching process in reviews of restoration outcomes

Full text
Author(s):
Romanelli, Jo Ao Paulo [1] ; Silva, Luiz G. M. [2] ; Goncalves, Maria Carolina P. [3] ; Naves, Rafaela P. [4] ; De Almeida, Danilo Roberti Alves [5] ; De Resende, Angelica Faria [5] ; Rodrigues, Ricardo Ribeiro [1]
Total Authors: 7
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Luiz de Queiroz Coll Agr, Dept Forest Sci, Lab Ecol & Forest Restorat LERF, Ave Padua Dias 11, BR-13418900 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Inst Environm Engn IfU, Dept Civil Environm & Geomat Engn D BAUG, Stocker Lab, CH-8046 Zurich - Switzerland
[3] Fed Univ Sao Carlos UFSCar, Chem Engn Dept, Enzyme Technol Lab LabEnz, BR-13565905 Sao Carlos, SP - Brazil
[4] Univ Sao Paulo, Luiz de Queiroz Coll Agr, Dept Forest Sci, Ave Padua Dias 11, BR-13418900 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil
[5] Univ Sao Paulo, Luiz de Queiroz Coll Agr, Dept Forest Sci, Lab Trop Forestry LASTROP, Ave Padua Dias 11, BR-13418900 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 5
Document type: Review article
Source: RESTORATION ECOLOGY; v. 29, n. 8 AUG 2021.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

In the recently declared United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021-2030), evidence-based research has an essential role in summarizing restoration outcomes toward broad generalizations to advance restoration practice and science globally. However, to present trustworthy, high-quality recommendations, evidence reviews should be based on rigorous methods that minimize bias and enhance systematicity, transparency, objectivity, comprehensiveness, and repeatability. To assess the current value of restoration reviews in terms of methodological repeatability at the searching stage, a fundamental review stage, we evaluated a sample of meta-analyses and narrative syntheses (n = 79) and critically appraised how searches were conducted based on the information reported within each study. By assessing whether review methods were reported in sufficient detail to be repeated by an independent party, we found that repeatability varied substantially by the standard we used. Overall, reviews performed relatively poorly, with a median score of 3 out of 9 points available, and a mean score of 3.6. Most reviews (n = 76/79) failed in effectively reporting all necessary information to allow repeatability at this stage. We found no statistically significant differences considering review types, suggesting that the type of synthesis alone does not solely reflect the repeatability of a review. Toward increasingly repeatable, reliable reviews in restoration ecology, we recommend that authors incorporate and apply principles of systematic reviews and maps in their review process, and suggest that environmental journals should broadly emphasize ways of performing rigorous reviews, as well as increase efforts for the publication of open access review protocols. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 19/23908-4 - Design of new biocatalizers by surface modifications of post-immobilization lipases for application in xylose oleate synthesis
Grantee:Maria Carolina Pereira Gonçalves
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
FAPESP's process: 19/24049-5 - Monitoring São Paulo State restoration forests: application of new remote sensing tools and subsidies for public policies
Grantee:Angelica Faria de Resende
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral
FAPESP's process: 18/18416-2 - Understanding restored forests for benefiting people and nature - NewFor
Grantee:Pedro Henrique Santin Brancalion
Support Opportunities: BIOTA-FAPESP Program - Thematic Grants
FAPESP's process: 18/21338-3 - Monitoring forest landscape restoration from unmanned aerial vehicles using Lidar and hyperspectral remote sensing
Grantee:Danilo Roberti Alves de Almeida
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral
FAPESP's process: 13/50718-5 - Ecological restoration of riparian forests, native forest of economic production and of degraded forest fragments (in APP and RL) based on restoration ecology of reference ecosystems in order to scientifically test the precepts of the New Brazilian Forest Code
Grantee:Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues
Support Opportunities: BIOTA-FAPESP Program - Thematic Grants
FAPESP's process: 19/08533-4 - Understanding ecological and social aspects of restoration actions in tropical regions through systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Grantee:João Paulo Romanelli
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral