评估应用生态学和保护证据库中的时间不稳定性。

IF 5 2区 生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Elizabeth Brisco, Elena Kulinskaya, Julia Koricheva
{"title":"评估应用生态学和保护证据库中的时间不稳定性。","authors":"Elizabeth Brisco,&nbsp;Elena Kulinskaya,&nbsp;Julia Koricheva","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Outcomes of meta-analyses are increasingly used to inform evidence-based decision making in various research fields. However, a number of recent studies have reported rapid temporal changes in magnitude and significance of the reported effects which could make policy-relevant recommendations from meta-analyses to quickly go out of date. We assessed the extent and patterns of temporal trends in magnitude and statistical significance of the cumulative effects in meta-analyses in applied ecology and conservation published between 2004 and 2018. Of the 121 meta-analyses analysed, 93% showed a temporal trend in cumulative effect magnitude or significance with 27% of the datasets exhibiting temporal trends in both. The most common trend was the early study effect when at least one of the first 5 years effect size estimates exhibited more than 50% magnitude difference to the subsequent estimate. The observed temporal trends persisted in majority of datasets once moderators were accounted for. Only 5 datasets showed significant changes in sample size over time which could potentially explain the observed temporal change in the cumulative effects. Year of publication of meta-analysis had no significant effect on presence of temporal trends in cumulative effects. Our results show that temporal changes in magnitude and statistical significance in applied ecology are widespread and represent a serious potential threat to use of meta-analyses for decision-making in conservation and environmental management. We recommend use of cumulative meta-analyses and call for more studies exploring the causes of the temporal effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":"15 3","pages":"398-412"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jrsm.1691","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of temporal instability in the applied ecology and conservation evidence base\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth Brisco,&nbsp;Elena Kulinskaya,&nbsp;Julia Koricheva\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jrsm.1691\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Outcomes of meta-analyses are increasingly used to inform evidence-based decision making in various research fields. However, a number of recent studies have reported rapid temporal changes in magnitude and significance of the reported effects which could make policy-relevant recommendations from meta-analyses to quickly go out of date. We assessed the extent and patterns of temporal trends in magnitude and statistical significance of the cumulative effects in meta-analyses in applied ecology and conservation published between 2004 and 2018. Of the 121 meta-analyses analysed, 93% showed a temporal trend in cumulative effect magnitude or significance with 27% of the datasets exhibiting temporal trends in both. The most common trend was the early study effect when at least one of the first 5 years effect size estimates exhibited more than 50% magnitude difference to the subsequent estimate. The observed temporal trends persisted in majority of datasets once moderators were accounted for. Only 5 datasets showed significant changes in sample size over time which could potentially explain the observed temporal change in the cumulative effects. Year of publication of meta-analysis had no significant effect on presence of temporal trends in cumulative effects. Our results show that temporal changes in magnitude and statistical significance in applied ecology are widespread and represent a serious potential threat to use of meta-analyses for decision-making in conservation and environmental management. We recommend use of cumulative meta-analyses and call for more studies exploring the causes of the temporal effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Synthesis Methods\",\"volume\":\"15 3\",\"pages\":\"398-412\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jrsm.1691\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Synthesis Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1691\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1691","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

荟萃分析的结果越来越多地被用于各研究领域的循证决策。然而,最近的一些研究报告显示,所报告的效应大小和显著性在时间上发生了快速变化,这可能会使荟萃分析中与政策相关的建议很快过时。我们评估了 2004 年至 2018 年间发表的应用生态学和保护荟萃分析中累积效应的规模和统计意义的时间趋势的程度和模式。在分析的 121 项元分析中,93% 显示出累积效应大小或显著性的时间趋势,27% 的数据集显示出两者的时间趋势。最常见的趋势是早期研究效应,即前 5 年的效应大小估计值中至少有一年与随后的估计值相差 50%以上。一旦考虑到调节因素,观察到的时间趋势在大多数数据集中持续存在。只有 5 个数据集的样本量随时间发生了显著变化,这可能解释了所观察到的累积效应的时间变化。荟萃分析的发表年份对累积效应的时间趋势没有明显影响。我们的研究结果表明,在应用生态学中,影响程度和统计意义的时间变化非常普遍,这对在保护和环境管理决策中使用荟萃分析构成了严重的潜在威胁。我们建议使用累积荟萃分析,并呼吁开展更多研究,探索时间效应的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Assessment of temporal instability in the applied ecology and conservation evidence base

Assessment of temporal instability in the applied ecology and conservation evidence base

Outcomes of meta-analyses are increasingly used to inform evidence-based decision making in various research fields. However, a number of recent studies have reported rapid temporal changes in magnitude and significance of the reported effects which could make policy-relevant recommendations from meta-analyses to quickly go out of date. We assessed the extent and patterns of temporal trends in magnitude and statistical significance of the cumulative effects in meta-analyses in applied ecology and conservation published between 2004 and 2018. Of the 121 meta-analyses analysed, 93% showed a temporal trend in cumulative effect magnitude or significance with 27% of the datasets exhibiting temporal trends in both. The most common trend was the early study effect when at least one of the first 5 years effect size estimates exhibited more than 50% magnitude difference to the subsequent estimate. The observed temporal trends persisted in majority of datasets once moderators were accounted for. Only 5 datasets showed significant changes in sample size over time which could potentially explain the observed temporal change in the cumulative effects. Year of publication of meta-analysis had no significant effect on presence of temporal trends in cumulative effects. Our results show that temporal changes in magnitude and statistical significance in applied ecology are widespread and represent a serious potential threat to use of meta-analyses for decision-making in conservation and environmental management. We recommend use of cumulative meta-analyses and call for more studies exploring the causes of the temporal effects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research Synthesis Methods
Research Synthesis Methods MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGYMULTID-MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
CiteScore
16.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines. Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines. By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信