Your evidence or mine? Systematic evaluation of reviews of marine protected area effectiveness
Your evidence or mine? Systematic evaluation of reviews of marine protected area effectiveness
复制标题
你的证据还是我的？
DOI：
10.1111/faf.12196
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
6.7
通讯作者：
Woodcock P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Woodcock P
海洋保护区（MPAs）是减轻渔业影响的一项关键战略，但其指定可能存在争议，并且围绕何时何地MPAs最有效存在不确定性。整理MPA有效性的初步研究的证据综合可以在研究、政策和实践之间提供重要的桥梁。然而，审查的范围和严格程度各不相同，这意味着决策者面临着确定适当审查的挑战。因此，记录综述之间的差异可以帮助非专业人员找到最相关和最严格的综述，也可以帮助研究人员找到证据缺口。我们通过系统地搜索审查海洋保护区对生物多样性的有效性的评论，严格评估所使用的方法和分类审查范围来解决这些优先事项。所评估的27项审查在范围上重叠（表明有些重复），在可靠性上有很大差异。主要优势涉及海洋保护区对鱼类丰度的影响以及海洋保护区大小和年龄对有效性的影响。然而，也注意到了一些差距，有些问题没有得到解决，而另一些问题则缺乏高度可靠的综合-重要的是，后者可能会造成某些问题已经得到充分解决的印象，从而可能阻碍新的综合。我们的研究结果表明，审查行为的关键方面可以改进（例如，记录主要研究的批判性评价，评估潜在的出版偏倚），并可以通过指导非专家进行最可靠和最相关的审查来促进循证政策。最后，我们建议，未来的审查与更广泛的分类覆盖面，并考虑到更广泛的MPA的有效性特征的影响将是有益的。
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a key strategy for mitigating the impacts of fisheries, but their designation can be controversial, and there is uncertainty surrounding when and where MPAs are most effective. Evidence synthesis that collates primary research on MPA effectiveness can provide a crucial bridge between research, policy and practice. However, reviews vary in scope and rigour, meaning decision‐makers face the challenge of identifying appropriate reviews. Documenting differences amongst reviews can therefore support nonspecialists in locating the most relevant and rigorous reviews and can also assist researchers in targeting evidence gaps. We addressed these priorities by systematically searching for reviews examining effectiveness of MPAs for biodiversity, critically appraising methods used and categorizing review scope. The 27 reviews assessed overlapped in scope (suggesting some redundancy) and differed substantially in reliability. Key strengths related to the effects of MPAs on fish abundance and the influence of MPA size and age on effectiveness. However, several gaps were noted, with some questions not addressed and others lacking highly reliable syntheses – importantly, the latter may create the perception that particular questions have been adequately addressed, potentially deterring new syntheses. Our findings indicate key aspects of review conduct that could be improved (e.g. documenting critical appraisal of primary research, evaluating potential publication bias) and can facilitate evidence‐based policy by guiding nonspecialists to the most reliable and relevant reviews. Lastly, we suggest that future reviews with broader taxonomic coverage and considering the influence of a wider range of MPA characteristics on effectiveness would be beneficial.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
J. Lubchenco;K. Grorud‐Colvert
通讯作者：
J. Lubchenco;K. Grorud‐Colvert
应对海洋保护区荟萃分析中的发表偏差
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
B. Huntington
通讯作者：
B. Huntington
DOI：
10.1163/ej.9789004146174.i-394.38
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
--
影响因子：
--
作者：
A. Simcock
通讯作者：
A. Simcock
温带海洋保护区的科学基础是否过于温暖和坚硬？
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
A. Caveen;C. Sweeting;T. J. Willis;N. Polunin
通讯作者：
N. Polunin
避免当前海洋保护区设计中的监督
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
S. Gaines;B. Gaylord;J. Largier
通讯作者：
J. Largier