Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

What is an Ecosystem?01:17

What is an Ecosystem?

46.7K
Overview
46.7K
The Soil Ecosystem02:23

The Soil Ecosystem

24.6K
Plants obtain inorganic minerals and water from the soil, which acts as a natural medium for land plants. The composition and quality of soil depend not only on the chemical constituents but also on the presence of living organisms. In general, soils contain three major components:
24.6K
The Evidence for Evolution02:55

The Evidence for Evolution

47.7K
Genetic variations accumulating within populations over generations give rise to biological evolution. Evolutionary changes can result in the formation of novel varieties and entire new species. These changes are responsible for the diverse forms of life inhabiting the planet. The evidence for evolution suggests that all living organisms descended from common ancestors.
47.7K
Review and Preview01:10

Review and Preview

8.3K
In statistics, several tools are used to interpret the data. Measures of central tendency represent the characteristics of the data, such as mean, median, and mode. Additionally, measures of variance like standard deviation and range are used to find the spread of data from the mean. Relative standing measures the distance between data locations. Commonly used measures of relative standings are percentile, z score, and quartiles.
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
8.3K
Review and Preview01:13

Review and Preview

10.9K
Data are individual items of information obtained from a population or sample. Data may be classified as qualitative (categorical), quantitative continuous, or quantitative discrete. Because it is not practical to measure the entire population in a study, researchers use samples to represent the population. A random sample is a representative group from the population chosen by using a method that gives each individual in the population an equal chance of being included in the sample. Random...
10.9K
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection01:05

Difference from Background: Limit of Detection

8.1K
The limit of detection (LOD) is the smallest amount of analyte that can be distinguished from the background noise. The LOD value corresponds to the concentration at which the analyte signal is three times larger than the standard deviation of the blank signal. Below this value, the analyte signal cannot be differentiated from the background noise. It is calculated by dividing the calibration slope by 3 times the standard deviation of the blank signals.
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
8.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cochrane Evaluation of (Semi-) Automated Review Methods (CESAR): Protocol for an adaptive platform study within reviews.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same author

Reviewing ecosystems of evidence: synthesising the evidence on the commercial determinants of health from a complex systems perspective.

Systematic reviews·2026
Same author

Effects of active travel interventions in the UK on disadvantaged population groups and their potential to reduce health inequalities: systematic review.

Journal of epidemiology and community health·2026
Same author

Evaluation of Routine Clinical Deployment of an Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Assistant for Cataract Follow-Up in the National Health Service.

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)·2026
Same author

Comparison of AI-assisted and human-produced podcasts derived from Cochrane Plain Language Summaries: protocol for a randomised non-inferiority trial (Health Information Effectiveness Trials-2).

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same author

AI Methods for Implementation Science (AIM-IS): developing a framework, toolkit, and reporting standard for the responsible use of AI in implementation practice and research.

Implementation science : IS·2026
Same journal

Outcomes in offspring of interventions to treat substance use in pregnancy: protocol for an umbrella review.

Systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Association of inflammatory fluid biomarkers with the progression of Alzheimer's disease: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Environmental moderators of neighbourhood socioeconomic inequalities in mental health: a systematic review protocol.

Systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Defining interstitial lung disease related to idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a systematic review protocol of the Myositis Clinical Trial Consortium (MCTC).

Systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

Sexual and reproductive health information needs of young adults with chronic conditions: a scoping review protocol.

Systematic reviews·2026
Same journal

A critical systematic review of the impact of sedentarism and physical inactivity on the cognitive performance of children.

Systematic reviews·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Simulating Impacts of Ice Storms on Forest Ecosystems
06:27

Simulating Impacts of Ice Storms on Forest Ecosystems

Published on: June 30, 2020

7.4K

Clarifying differences between reviews within evidence ecosystems.

David Gough1, James Thomas2, Sandy Oliver2,3

  • 1EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Department of Social Science, University College London, London, England. david.gough@ucl.ac.uk.

Systematic Reviews
|July 17, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Systematic reviews must consider dynamic evidence ecosystems. Understanding these changing contexts is crucial for refining review methods and addressing differences in review aims, structure, and scope.

More Related Videos

Assessing the Putative Anticryptococcal Properties of Crude and Clarified Extracts from Mollusks
09:18

Assessing the Putative Anticryptococcal Properties of Crude and Clarified Extracts from Mollusks

Published on: December 2, 2022

1.4K
Ecosystem Fabrication EcoFAB Protocols for The Construction of Laboratory Ecosystems Designed to Study Plant-microbe Interactions
11:57

Ecosystem Fabrication EcoFAB Protocols for The Construction of Laboratory Ecosystems Designed to Study Plant-microbe Interactions

Published on: April 10, 2018

19.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Simulating Impacts of Ice Storms on Forest Ecosystems
06:27

Simulating Impacts of Ice Storms on Forest Ecosystems

Published on: June 30, 2020

7.4K
Assessing the Putative Anticryptococcal Properties of Crude and Clarified Extracts from Mollusks
09:18

Assessing the Putative Anticryptococcal Properties of Crude and Clarified Extracts from Mollusks

Published on: December 2, 2022

1.4K
Ecosystem Fabrication EcoFAB Protocols for The Construction of Laboratory Ecosystems Designed to Study Plant-microbe Interactions
11:57

Ecosystem Fabrication EcoFAB Protocols for The Construction of Laboratory Ecosystems Designed to Study Plant-microbe Interactions

Published on: April 10, 2018

19.2K

Area of Science:

  • Evidence synthesis
  • Systematic review methodology
  • Health research

Background:

  • Previous work highlighted insufficient differentiation in systematic review types and methods.
  • Systematic reviews operate within dynamic 'evidence ecosystems' that constantly evolve.

Discussion:

  • Explores how dynamic evidence ecosystems influence the dimensions of systematic reviews.
  • Applies the evidence ecosystem concept to analyze differences in review aims, approach, structure, components, breadth, depth, and 'work done'.
  • Argues for a more context-aware approach to systematic review development and refinement.

Key Insights:

  • Systematic review methods are not static; they operate within and are influenced by changing evidence ecosystems.
  • The 'dimensions of difference' in reviews are better understood when considering their broader contextual dynamics.
  • A nuanced understanding of review methodologies requires acknowledging the interplay between methods and their surrounding evidence environments.

Outlook:

  • Suggests future research should further investigate the characteristics and impact of evidence ecosystems on review practices.
  • Advocates for the development of systematic review approaches that are more adaptable to dynamic research contexts.
  • Highlights the need for ongoing refinement of review methodologies informed by evolving evidence landscapes.