Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management

By Andrew Pullin, G. Stewart. Conservation Biology, 2006

1,054 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/349bc2763e738ac87e600f874ba22f8a8cfba168

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

In Sociology and Political Science

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments (2010, methodology): “Systematic review methodology is widely employed in medicine and public health [21,22], and more recently within environmental management [23, 24 ], as a way of synthesising the evidence from research for the effectiveness of particular interventions.”
Is nest predator exclusion an effective strategy for enhancing bird populations (2011, methodology): “, 2004) by using explicit systematic review methodology (Pullin and Stewart, 2006) and rigorous metaanalytical techniques to assess the impact of predator exclusion techniques on avian hatching success.”
Biogeographical patterns in the diet of an opportunistic predator: the red fox Vulpes vulpes in the Iberian Peninsula (2013, methodology): “Various sources of information were used to review the available literature comprehensively, as recommended by Pullin and Stewart (2006). Search engines (ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar) were used to identify relevant scientific studies containing information about the trophic ecology of the r”
Host range expansion of native insects to exotic trees increases with area of introduction and the presence of congeneric native trees (2015, background): “A protocol was developed for a systematic review (Pullin & Stewart 2006) of the forest insect species native to Europe which expanded their host range to these introduced trees.”
Causes of warm‐edge range limits: systematic review, proximate factors and implications for climate change (2014, background): “Parmesan et al. (2005) synthesized 145 studies of range edges, but their search for studies was not systematic (i.e. using replicable automated searches of literature databases with specified keywords; Pullin & Stewart, 2006; Lowry et al., 2012).”
A quantitative review of relationships between ecosystem services (2014, neutral): “However, using non peer-reviewed literature has the drawback that quality standards are lower (Pullin and Stewart, 2006; Nieto-Romero et al., 2014; Harrison et al., 2014).”
Insect pollinators collect pollen from wind‐pollinated plants: implications for pollination ecology and sustainable agriculture (2018, background): “Relying only on scholarly database searches can result in publication bias of results (Pullin & Stewart, 2006), as individual databases usually focus on a specialised set of journals depending on institutional access.”
Processes and technologies for the recycling and recovery of spent lithium-ion batteries (2016, neutral): “The methodology used for this systematic review is described in [18,19], and consists of the following steps: (cid:1) An exhaustive literature search performed by applying pre-de ﬁ ned criteria for the identi ﬁ cation of the most relevant articles in the ﬁ eld.”
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension (2021, methodology): “Therefore, an integral step of a formal systematic review is to evaluate the quality of the information that is being aggregated (Pullin & Stewart, 2006; Haddaway & Verhoeven, 2015).”
ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps (2018, background): “frequently used to assess the effectiveness of management interventions or the effect of an anthropogenic action or natural impact [7, 9].”
The impacts of roads and other infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: a meta-analysis. (2010, background): “…infrastructure, either locally (Forman and Deblinger, 2000) or at the global scale (UNEP, 2001; Nellemann et al., 2003b; Fahrig and Rytwinski, 2009), but none of them followed the guidelines for systematic reviews (Pullin and Stewart, 2006) or summarized the information by means of a meta-analysis.”
Seed dispersal by ungulates as an ecological filter: a trait-based meta-analysis (2015, background): “As ecological data are often subject to uncontrolled variations (Pullin and Stewart 2006), we assumed that the study effect sizes had been sampled from a distribution of effect sizes.”