Letter to the EditorCutting through the complexity to aid evidence synthesis. A response to Haddaway and Dicks
References (11)
- et al.
Managers consider multiple lines of evidence important for biodiversity management decisions
J. Environ. Manag.
(2012) - et al.
Simplifying the selection of evidence synthesis methods to inform environmental decisions: a guide for decision makers and scientists
Biol. Conserv.
(2017) - et al.
Conservation practitioners' perspectives on decision triggers for evidence-based management
J. Appl. Ecol.
(2016) Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services. The
(1972)- et al.
Contribution of systematic reviews to management decisions
Conserv. Biol.
(2013)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.
Cited by (1)
Structured methodology review identified seven (RETREAT) criteria for selecting qualitative evidence synthesis approaches
2018, Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyCitation Excerpt :Such complexity defies encapsulation within any single algorithm. A recent attempt to examine motivations for the choice of review types more generally [64] has been criticized for its oversimplification in reducing a multifactorial decision into a single-decision path [65,66]. When such an algorithm has been attempted by commentators [13], it necessarily affords primacy to one or more guiding variables (e.g., the role of theory).
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.