Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 3, 2026

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
Published on: June 13, 2025
Building transparency, credibility and trust in evidence synthesis practice: why editorial standards and policies
Nicolas Roth1, Yefeng Yang2, Frederic Coulon3
1ethox Consulting, Bern, Switzerland; Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract:
Editorial standards are not administrative formalities; they function as scientific quality control mechanisms that directly shape the validity, credibility, integrity, and utility of published research. Since 2016, Environment International has been the first environmental health journal to implement specialist editorial policies for handling systematic review submissions. Over the past decade, Environment International has been committed to the continuous advancement and rigorous editorial standards to ensure publication of trustworthy, high-impact evidence-based research. Central to this effort is the CREST_Triage tool (https://osf.io/bv4en), which enables transparent and rigorous editorial assessment of methodological quality, reporting completeness and reproducibility. In this editorial, we describe the recent developments in our editorial policies and efforts undertaken to further develop and strengthen our standards for evidence syntheses and narrative reviews. A major component of this work has been the expansion of our editorial policies to scoping reviews, review of reviews, their respective protocols, and narrative reviews, which is reflected by the development of new triage instruments, guidance, and workflows, which we have implemented in April 2025. Environment International remains one of the very few journals that actively implement effective quality control measures and enforcement of editorial standards for the evidence syntheses it publishes. We believe that transparent and consistent editorial triage criteria and decisions are beneficial to our authors, peer-reviewers, and the field at large. Amidst the reproducibility crisis in science and increasing concern over the validity of evidence syntheses in environmental health, including those introduced by generative artificial intelligence, we call for stronger editorial stewardship and wider adoption of specialist editorial policies by other journals to increase the quality, transparency and reproducibility of evidence syntheses, leading to more comparable manuscript evaluations across journals. As the evidence synthesis toolkit and practice continues to evolve, our editorial policies and standards will adapt accordingly, ensuring that Environment International remains at the forefront, while upholding the philosophy and principles that have guided us from the beginning.
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation V: CBE
In CBE, healthcare professionals establish predefined standards of practice that define what constitutes...
Social Proof
Ethics in Research
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
The Evidence for Evolution
Self-Evaluation: Self-Enhancement and Self-Verification