Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow

O’Connor, Annette M.; Löveï, Gábor L.; Eales, Jacqualyn; Frampton, Geoff K; Glanville, Julie; Pullin, Andrew S.; Sargeant, Jan M.

doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2012.en-367

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our aim here is to present an up‐to‐date synthesis of the available quantitative evidence on predation pressure on invertebrates using the sentinel prey method. While we did not use the full protocol (see O'Connor et al ., ), we applied several elements of the evidence‐based synthesis to make our review more transparent and repeatable. After the analysis and presentation of the structure of the available evidence, we examined support for the following hypotheses: (1)Recorded predation pressure is higher on real than artificial prey.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the sentinel prey method as a way of quantifying invertebrate predation under field conditions

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sentinel prey can provide a direct, quantitative measure of predation under field conditions. Live sentinel prey provides more realistic data but rarely allows the partitioning of the total predation pressure; artificial prey is less natural but traces left by different predators are identifiable, making it suitable for comparative studies. We reviewed the available evidence of the use of both types of invertebrate sentinel prey. Fifty-seven papers used real prey, usually measuring predation on a focal (often pest) species, with studies overwhelmingly from North America. The median predation was 25.8% d . Artificial sentinel prey (45 papers) were used in both temperate and tropical areas, placed more above ground than at ground level. The most commonly used artificial prey imitated a caterpillar. Up to 14 predator groups were identified, registering a median of 8.8% d predation; half the studies reported only bird predation. Predation on real prey was higher than on artificial ones, but invertebrate predation was not higher than vertebrate predation. Invertertebrate but not vertebrate predation was negatively related to prey size. Predation near the Equator was not higher than at higher latitudes, nor in cultivated than noncultivated habitats. The use of sentinel prey is not yet standardised in terms of prey size, arrangement, exposure period or data reporting. Due to the simplicity and ease of use of the method, such standardisation may increase the usefulness of comparative studies, contributing to the understanding of the importance and level of predation in various habitats worldwide.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the sentinel prey method as a way of quantifying invertebrate predation under field conditions

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Systematic reviews (SRs) use an evidence synthesis approach that provides robust and transparent answers to clearly formulated questions. Originally developed for use in clinical practice, SRs have wider applicability, including food and feed safety risk assessment (O'Connor et al., ). EFSA has developed a framework for identifying the different types of question suitable for SRs within broad risk assessments (EFSA, ) and also implemented their use in animal health risk assessments.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the potential spread and maintenance of foot-and-mouth disease virus infection in wild ungulates: general principles and application to a specific scenario in Thrace

Dhollander

Belsham

Lange

et al. 2014

Transbound Emerg Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), due to infection with serotype O virus, occurred in wild boar and within eleven outbreaks in domestic livestock in the south-east of Bulgaria, Thrace region, in 2011. Hence, the issue of the potential for the spread and maintenance of FMD virus (FMDV) infection in a population of wild ungulates became important. This assessment focused on the spread and maintenance of FMDV infection within a hypothetical wild boar and deer population in an environment, which is characterized by a climate transitional between Mediterranean and continental and variable wildlife population densities. The assessment was based on three aspects: (i) a systematic review of the literature focusing on experimental infection studies to identify the parameters describing the duration of FMDV infection in deer and wild boar, as well as observational studies assessing the occurrence of FMDV infection in wild deer and wild boar populations, (ii) prevalence survey data of wild boar and deer in Bulgaria and Turkey and (iii) an epidemiological model, simulating the host-to-host spread of FMDV infections. It is concluded, based on all three aspects, that the wildlife population in Thrace, and so wildlife populations in similar ecological settings, are probably not able to maintain FMD in the long term in the absence of FMDV infection in the domestic host population. However, limited spread of FMDV infection in time and space in the wildlife populations can occur. If there is a continued cross-over of FMDV between domestic and wildlife populations or a higher population density, virus circulation may be prolonged.

show abstract

“…Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, CAB Abstracts, Medline) allows some consideration of complementarity and redundancy (O'Connor et al, 2012). Applicants shall also consider searching more specialist/subject-specific databases (e.g., Agricola).…”

Section: Electronic Bibliographic Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explanatory note on literature searching conducted in the context of GMO applications for (renewed) market authorisation and annual post‐market environmental monitoring reports on GMOs authorised in the EU market

Devos¹,

Guajardo²,

Glanville³

et al. 2017

EFS3

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guidance of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assists applicants in the preparation and presentation of their market registration applications by describing elements and information/data requirements for the risk assessment and monitoring of GMOs. This explanatory note to the guidance: (1) clarifies the scope and methodology for literature searching performed in the context of applications for market authorisation of GMOs No 503/2013 entered into force; annual post-market environmental monitoring reports on GMOs authorised in the EU market; and GMO applications for the renewed market authorisation of GM food/feed authorised under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 and (2) provides detailed recommendations on how to conduct and report systematic/extensive literature searches, and present the results of any scoping reviews.

show abstract

Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow

Cited by 11 publications

References 77 publications

A review of the sentinel prey method as a way of quantifying invertebrate predation under field conditions

A review of the sentinel prey method as a way of quantifying invertebrate predation under field conditions

Assessing the potential spread and maintenance of foot-and-mouth disease virus infection in wild ungulates: general principles and application to a specific scenario in Thrace

Explanatory note on literature searching conducted in the context of GMO applications for (renewed) market authorisation and annual post‐market environmental monitoring reports on GMOs authorised in the EU market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About