Top

Environmental Management

Published in:

03-11-2023

Patterns and Pitfalls of Short-cuts Used in Environmental Management Rapid Reviews

Authors: Meagan Harper, Trina Rytwinski, Steven J. Cooke

Published in: Environmental Management | Issue 2/2024

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Environmental managers and policy-makers need reliable evidence to make effective decisions. Systematic reviews are one way to provide this information but are time-consuming and may not meet the needs of decision-makers when faced with rapidly changing management requirements or transient policy-windows. Rapid reviews are one type of knowledge synthesis that follow simplified or truncated methods compared to systematic reviews. Rapid reviews on environmentally-relevant topics are growing in prevalence, but it is unclear if rapid reviews use similar short-cuts or follow available guidelines. In this methodological review, we assess 26 rapid reviews published between 2002 and 2023. Numerous rapid review short-cuts and approaches were identified, with few consistencies among studies. Short-cuts were present in all stages of the review process, with some of the most common short-cuts including not developing an a priori review protocol, not including stakeholder involvement, or not conducting critical appraisal of study validity. Poor quality in reporting of methods was observed. Fewer than half of assessed rapid reviews reported using available guidelines when developing their methods. Future rapid reviews should aim for improved reporting and adherence to published guidelines to help increase the useability and evidence-user confidence. This will also enable readers to understand where short-cuts were made and their potential consequences for the conclusions of the review.

previous article Fecal Impairment Framework, A New Conceptual Framework for Assessing Fecal Contamination in Recreational Waters

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Albanito F, Jordon M, Abdalla M, et al. (2022) Agroecology–a Rapid Evidence Review. Report to the UK Climate Change Committee. P. 87

Balikuddembe JK, Di B, Reinhardt JD et al. (2023) A Haddon matrix-based analysis of the anthropogenic drivers of floods in 10 Eastern African partner countries of the Belt and Road Initiative 1990–2021. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 92:103683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103683CrossRef

Best L, Stevens A, Colin‐Jones D (1997) Rapid and responsive health technology assessment: the development and evaluation process in the South and West region of England. J Clin Eff 2:51–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb020865CrossRef

Bollens SM, Cordell JR, Avent S, Hooff R (2002) Zooplankton invasions: a brief review, plus two case studies from the northeast Pacific Ocean. Hydrobiologia 480:87–110. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021233018533CrossRef

Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H (2002) A brief history of research synthesis. Eval Health Prof 25(1):12–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278702025001003CrossRefPubMed

[CEE] Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (2022) Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 5.1

Collins A, Coughlin D, Miller J, Kirk S (2015) The production of quick scoping reviews and rapid evidence assessments: A how to guide. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: UK Government

Cook CN, Nichols SJ, Webb JA et al. (2017) Simplifying the selection of evidence synthesis methods to inform environmental decisions: A guide for decision makers and scientists. Biol Conserv 213:135–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.004CrossRef

Critical Appraisal Skills Program (2022) CASP qualitative checklist

de Fine Licht K, de Fine Licht J (2020) Artificial intelligence, transparency, and public decision-making. AI Soc 35:917–926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-00960-wCrossRef

Dobbins M (2017) Rapid Review Guidebook: Steps for conducting a rapid review. National Collaborating Center for Methods and Tools (NCCMT), Canada

Downey H, Spelten E, Holmes K, Van Vuuren J (2022) A rapid review of recreational, cultural, and environmental meanings of water for Australian river communities. Soc Nat Resour 35:556–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2022.2032894CrossRef

Folke C, Polasky S, Rockström J et al. (2021) Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere. Ambio 50:834–869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01544-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralADS

Forbes S, Bicknell E, Guilovica L et al. (2021) A rapid review of the environmental impacts associated with food consumption in Australia and New Zealand. Curr Nutr Rep. 10:334–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-021-00374-0CrossRefPubMed

Freitas Neto LL, Espósito BP (2023) Toxicity of zinc oxide to scleractinian corals and zooxanthellae: a brief review. Quím Nova 46:266–272. https://doi.org/10.21577/0100-4042.20230003CrossRef

Garritty C, Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B et al. (2021) Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 130:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007CrossRefPubMed

Gates A, Gates M, Sim S et al. (2021) Creating efficiencies in the extraction of data from randomized trials: a prospective evaluation of a machine learning and text mining tool. BMC Med Res Methodol 21:169. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01354-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Godfray HCJ, Blacquière T, Field LM et al. (2014) A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning neonicotinoid insecticides and insect pollinators. Proc R Soc B: Biol Sci 281:20140558. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.0558CrossRef

Green L, Webb E, Johnson E et al. (2023) Cost-effective approach to explore key impacts on the environment from agricultural tools to inform sustainability improvements: inversion tillage as a case study. Environ Sci Eur 35:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-023-00784-7CrossRef

Haddaway NR, Macura B, Whaley P, Pullin AS (2017) ROSES for systematic review reports. Version 1.0. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5897272

Haddaway NR, Westgate MJ (2019) Predicting the time needed for environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Conserv Biol 33:434–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13231CrossRefPubMed

Haddaway NR, Woodcock P, Macura B, Collins A (2015) Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews. Conserv Biol 29:1596–1605. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12541CrossRefPubMed

Hamel C, Michaud A, Thuku M et al. (2020a) Few evaluative studies exist examining rapid review methodology across stages of conduct: a systematic scoping review. J Clin Epidemiol 126:131–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.027CrossRefPubMed

Hamel C, Michaud A, Thaku M et al. (2020b) Defining rapid reviews: a systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of definitions and defining characteristics of rapid reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 129:74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.041CrossRefPubMed

Houghton-Carr HA, Boorman DB, Heuser K (2013) Land use, climate change and water availability: Phase 2a. Rapid Evidence Assessment: Results and synthesis. NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, UK, p 45

Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R et al. (2012) Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev 1:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kincaid K, Rose G, Devillers R (2017) How fisher-influenced marine closed areas contribute to ecosystem-based management: A review and performance indicator scorecard. Fish Fish 18:860–876. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12211CrossRef

Lagisz M, Vasilakopoulou K, Bridge C et al. (2022) Rapid systematic reviews for synthesizing research on built environment. Environ Dev 43:100730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2022.100730CrossRef

Luke SH, Slade EM, Gray CL, Annammala KV et al. (2019) Riparian buffers in tropical agriculture: Scientific support, effectiveness and directions for policy. J Appl Ecol 56:85–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13280CrossRef

Marshall IJ, Marshall R, Wallace BC et al. (2019) Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol 109:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.12.015CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Miller, Casas-Mulet KA, Little R, de SC et al. (2018) Deficiencies in our understanding of the hydro-ecology of several native Australian fish: a rapid evidence synthesis. Mar Freshw Res 69:1208–1221. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF17241CrossRef

Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E et al. (2018) What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol 18:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Naz A, Chowdhury A (2022) Pollutant extraction from water and soil using Montmorillonite clay-polymer composite: A rapid review. Mater Today: Proc 60:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.366CrossRef

Nunez-Mir GC, Liebhold AM, Guo Q et al. (2017) Biotic resistance to exotic invasions: its role in forest ecosystems, confounding artifacts, and future directions. Biol Invasions 19:3287–3299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1413-5CrossRef

Norris RH, Webb JA, Nichols SJ et al. (2012) Analyzing cause and effect in environmental assessments: using weighted evidence from the literature. Freshw Sci 31:5–21. https://doi.org/10.1899/11-027.1CrossRef

Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z et al. (2016) Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 5:210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Pandor A, Kaltenthaler E, Martyn-St James M et al. (2019) Delphi consensus reached to produce a decision tool for SelecTing Approaches for Rapid Reviews (STARR). J Clin Epidemiol 114:22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.06.005CrossRefPubMed

Pullin AS, Stewart GB (2006) Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol 20(6):1647–1656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.xCrossRefPubMed

Pullin AS, Cheng SH, Cooke SJ et al. (2020) Informing conservation decisions through evidence synthesis and communication. In: Vickery JA, Ockendon N, Pettorelli N, et al., (eds) Conservation Research, Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 114–128CrossRef

Pullin A (2023) Introducing PROCEED: a new service for fast registration and publication of protocols for environmental evidence syntheses, including Rapid Reviews. Environ Evid 12:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-022-00295-7CrossRef

Quarmby S, Santos G, Mathias M (2019) Air quality strategies and technologies: a rapid review of the international evidence. Sustainability 11:2757. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102757CrossRef

Qureshi R, Shaughnessy D, Gill KAR et al. (2023) Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? Syst Rev 12:72. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02243-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Retief FP, Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A et al. (2023) Gaining a deeper understanding of the psychology underpinning significance judgements in environmental impact assessment (EIA). Impact Assess Proj Appraisal 41:250–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2181248CrossRef

Rochefort G, Lapointe A, Mercier A-P et al. (2021) A rapid review of territorialized food systems and their impacts on human health, food security, and the environment. Nutrients 13:3345. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13103345CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rose DC, Mukherjee N, Simmons BI et al. (2020) Policy windows for the environment: Tips for improving the uptake of scientific knowledge. Environ Sci Policy 113:47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.07.013CrossRef

Rowland JA, Bracey C, Moore JL et al. (2021) Effectiveness of conservation interventions globally for degraded peatlands in cool-climate regions. Biol Conserv 263:109327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109327CrossRef

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA et al. (2007) Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Silici L, Rowe A, Suppiramaniam N, Knox JW (2021) Building adaptive capacity of smallholder agriculture to climate change: evidence synthesis on learning outcomes. Environ Res Commun 3:122001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac44dfCrossRef

Snapp SS, Kebede Y, Wollenberg EK et al. (2021) Agroecology and climate change rapid evidence review: Performance of agroecological approaches in low-and middle-income countries. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Wageningen, the Netherlands, https://hdl.handle.net/10568/113487

Stetkiewicz S, Menary J, Nair A et al. (2023) Food system actor perspectives on future-proofing European food systems through plant breeding. Sci Rep. 13:5444. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32207-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralADS

Sun Y, Ding J, Siemann E, Keller SR (2020) Biocontrol of invasive weeds under climate change: progress, challenges and management implications. Curr Opin Insect Sci 38:72–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2020.02.003CrossRefPubMed

Sutherland WJ, Pullin AS, Dolman PM, Knight TM (2004) The need for evidence-based conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 19:305–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018CrossRefPubMed

Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A (2019) Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Inf Libr J 36:202–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12276CrossRef

Thomas‐Walters L, Nyboer EA, Taylor JJ et al. (2021) An optimistic outlook on the use of evidence syntheses to inform environmental decision‐making. Conservat Sci and Prac 3. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.426

Tresise ME, Reed MS, Chapman PJ (2021) Effects of hedgerow enhancement as a net zero strategy on farmland biodiversity: a rapid review. Emerald Open Res 3:23. https://doi.org/10.35241/emeraldopenres.14307.1CrossRef

Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W et al. (2015) A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med 13:224. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tsou AY, Treadwell JR, Erinoff E et al. (2020) Machine learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: comparative performance of Abstrackr and EPPI-Reviewer. Syst Rev 9:73. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01324-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Van Ruymbeke K, Ferreira JG, Gkisakis VD et al. (2023) Assessing the impact of farm-management practices on ecosystem services in European Agricultural Systems: A rapid evidence assessment. Sustainability 15:12819. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712819CrossRef

Webb JA, Schofield K, Peat M et al. (2017) Weaving common threads in environmental causal assessment methods: toward an ideal method for rapid evidence synthesis. Freshw Sci 36:250–256. https://doi.org/10.1086/690449CrossRef

Wells C, Collins CT (2022) A rapid evidence assessment of the potential risk to the environment presented by active ingredients in the UK’s most commonly sold companion animal parasiticides. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29(30):45070–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20204-2CrossRef

Westgate MJ (2019) revtools: An R package to support article screening for evidence synthesis. Res Synth Methods 10:606–614. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1374CrossRefPubMed

Wilkes MA, Mckenzie M, Webb JA (2018) Fish passage design for sustainable hydropower in the temperate Southern Hemisphere: an evidence review. Rev Fish Biol Fish 28:117–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-017-9496-8CrossRef

Yalwaji B, John-Nwagwu HO, Sogbanmu TO (2022) Plastic pollution in the environment in Nigeria: A rapid systematic review of the sources, distribution, research gaps and policy needs. Sci Afr 16:e01220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01220CrossRef

Zhang S, Wang J, Yan P et al. (2021) Non-biodegradable microplastics in soils: A brief review and challenge. J Hazard Mater 409:124525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124525CrossRefPubMed

Title: Patterns and Pitfalls of Short-cuts Used in Environmental Management Rapid Reviews
Authors: Meagan Harper
Trina Rytwinski
Steven J. Cooke
Publication date: 03-11-2023
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Environmental Management / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 0364-152X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-023-01901-1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Omernik’s Ecoregion Framework: a Legacy for Understanding Regional Patterns in Attainable Resource Quality

Promoting Bird Functional Diversity on Landscapes with a Matrix of Planted Eucalyptus spp. in the Atlantic Forest

Fecal Impairment Framework, A New Conceptual Framework for Assessing Fecal Contamination in Recreational Waters

Spatial heterogeneity and management challenges of ecosystem service trade-offs: a case study in Guangdong Province, China

It Takes Two to Tango: How Ability and Morality Shape Consumers’ Willingness to Refill and Reuse

The Effects of Environmental Education on Residents’ Ecological Security Behavior: The Mediating Role of Nature’s Psychological Ownership Perspective and The Moderating Role of Visual Fluency