UKPopNet Workshop 1 Undertaking a Systematic Review

UKPopNet Workshop 1

Undertaking a Systematic Review

Andrew S. PullinCentre for Evidence-Based ConservationUniversity of Birmingham, UK

What is anevidence-based framework?

A support framework for proceeding in decision-making that aims to provide the best available evidence to the decision-makers on the likely outcomes of alternative actions

Features of an Evidence-Based Framework

demands explicit user-generated question (including subject, intervention and desired outcome)

systematic review and evaluation of evidence (methodology ensuring standards of rigour, incl. peer review)

“push” delivery of information to point of need (active dissemination tailored to end user)

Features of a Review and Dissemination Unit

independence and objectivity networked to information sources, databases trained systematic reviewers complementary expertise (stats, languages, IT) linked to network of experts, professional

organisations and learned societies (review groups)

Key advantages of an evidence-based approach

Efficient, unbiased, systematic delivery of scientific evidence to decision-makers

Clear standard for best practice in knowledge transfer

Formalised method of identifying areas where evidence is lacking

Basis by which to move research funding toward more needs-led agenda

The Challenge

Can we construct something similar to the Cochrane Collaboration in medicine for biodiversity conservation and environmental management?

The Conservation Context

Conserving biodiversity involves making practical and policy decisions on appropriate action from a wide range of options

For biodiversity policy and conservation practice to be effective and credible, decision-makers need to know which actions do or do not work

Rationale for an Evidence-Based Framework

Decision quality reflects the ratio between the information that the decision maker has at hand and the sum total of relevant information that is potentially available.

What’s the problem?

Current decision-making processes may lack objective scientific rationale or evaluation of effectiveness.

Not a problem caused by decision-makers. In the absence of accessible evidence, they will inevitably rely on subjective methods combined with personal experience.

Pullin et al. 2004. Biological ConservationSutherland et al. 2004. TREE.

Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation

The Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation was established in 2003 with the goal of supporting decision making in conservation and environmental management through the production and dissemination of systematic reviews on the effectiveness of management and policy interventions. With support from a wide range of organisations in the environmental and academic sectors the CEBC now acts as both a source of evidence and co-ordinator of a fast-growing collaborative network undertaking systematic reviews. This website acts as the primary gateway to reliable information on effectiveness based on the best available scientific evidence.

About CEBC

· Background To CEBC

· Introduction to Systematic Review

· Getting involved in Evidence-Based Conservation

· CEBC News and Events

· CEBC Job Opportunities

CEBC Library

· Protocols

· Systematic Reviews

· External Publications

· Conference Presentations

Systematic Review Terminology

Consortium Partners

Contact Us

www.cebc.bham.ac.uk

NERC Knowledge Transfer Project

Implementing an evidence-based framework for review and dissemination of scientific evidence to support biodiversity conservation

Countryside Council for WalesEnglish NatureEnvironment AgencyJoint Nature Conservation CommitteeNational TrustRoyal Society for the Protection of BirdsBritish Ecological SocietyUK PopNet

Vision for an EBF

1. A collaborative network of Review and Dissemination Units (linked to data providers and user organisations)

2. Networked review groups – subject-based

3. CENTRAL LIBRARY OF REVIEWS

Crucial Question

With decision-making in all other major sectors of society (e.g. health, social services, education, economics) developing evidence-based frameworks, what are the consequences if the conservation/environmental sector does not develop its own?