Haddaway Neal R
Mistra EviEM, Stockholm Environment Institute, Box 24218, 104 51 Stockholm, Sweden.
J Environ Manage. 2017 Dec 1;203(Pt 1):612-614. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.043. Epub 2017 Mar 23.
In their recent review article, Mangano and Será (Journal of Environmental Management, 188:195-202) collate and describe the evidence base relating to the impacts of marine drilling platforms in the Mediterranean. The authors claim to have undertaken a systematic map using the Guidelines for Systematic Review in Environmental Management produced by the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) as a basis for their methods. Here, I highlight major problems with their methods and the reporting of their activities. I demonstrate that a higher level of rigour and transparency is necessary for a true systematic map. Whilst their work is not without merit and may prove useful for decision-makers, their review could have been conducted and reported to a greater level of reliability. I stress the importance of transparency, comprehensiveness, and repeatability in ensuring that reviews are reliable and fit-for-purpose. I highlight the pitfalls of the authors' approach in terms of: question framing; searching for evidence; the definition of grey literature; key outputs from systematic maps; and the dangers of vote-counting.
在他们最近的综述文章中,曼加诺和塞拉(《环境管理杂志》,第188卷:195 - 202页)整理并描述了与地中海海洋钻井平台影响相关的证据基础。作者声称他们以环境证据协作组织(CEE)制定的《环境管理系统评价指南》为方法基础,开展了一项系统图谱研究。在此,我强调他们方法以及活动报告中存在的主要问题。我证明,真正的系统图谱需要更高程度的严谨性和透明度。虽然他们的工作并非毫无价值,可能对决策者有用,但他们的综述本可以以更高的可靠性进行并报告。我强调透明度、全面性和可重复性在确保综述可靠且适用方面的重要性。我从以下方面突出了作者方法的缺陷:问题框架设定;证据搜索;灰色文献的定义;系统图谱的关键产出;以及计数表决的危险性。