State the problems (such as publication bias) and uncertainty that are inherent in any study or synthesis. Any potential bias or limitation in evidence searching and collation strategies should also be clear (Dicks et al ., 2017).
5. Where possible, assess and report on the cost (financial and other), cost-effectiveness, and side effects of potential interventions.
Information on the costs and outcomes on factors other than biodiversity should be collected where possible. This should include possible areas of conflict, for example, with other biodiversity or socioeconomic priorities. This can help inform the recommendation process.
Making recommendations
6. Specify the type and source of evidence used to make recommendations.
Make clear what evidence has been used. Document the review process and sources (e.g. scientific papers, grey literature, expert opinion, indigenous knowledge). Details of methods should be provided either in the guidance document or in a linked source (e.g. weblink or QR code) that explains how the evidence was identified and extracted. This allows the details of the original studies to be available to those who are interested in further research.
7. The strength of the evidence behind recommendations should be transparent.
If there is uncertain or conflicting evidence this should be made apparent, either by explicitly describing the evidence or using appropriate terms (strong evidence, some evidence, weak evidence, studies predominantly support, etc.). The scale of inference should also be clear, such as if the evidence is based on a subset of conditions or varies with context (e.g. species, location).
8. Make explicit where statements have been made in the absence of effectiveness information.
Make cases explicit where no evidence exists and recommendations are based upon first principles, theory or common sense. Consensus recommendations are still valuable when made without scientific evidence, for example, based on practitioner knowledge and experience. Explicitly labelling these cases reveals gaps in evidence-based guidance that inform future research.
9. Make explicit where recommendations are based on factors besides the evidence of effectiveness (e.g. costs, social acceptability).
Some recommendations are derived from a range of factors beyond the available evidence base, such as financial costs or the acceptability of outcomes and side effects to different stakeholders. This logic and the key factors should be made clear in the guidance. For example, there may be good evidence for the effectiveness of an action, but it may be too costly or socially unacceptable and so is not recommended.
30
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online