Maximizing the effectiveness of qualitative systematic reviews: A case study on terrestrial arthropod conservation translocations

摘要: Abstract Systematic literature reviews are frequently used in biodiversity conservation to identify knowledge gaps and strategies for improvement. Despite their important role, systematic not standardized often use different methods, standards success, data sources. We compared two on terrestrial arthropod translocations, unknowingly conducted by research groups at the same time. Both studies found geographic taxonomic biases, with most projects focusing certain countries (e.g., United States, Kingdom) taxa butterflies, grasshoppers), similar success rates (range: 52–58%). However, had conclusions about which factors significantly influenced translocation driven sources (published vs. from corresponding authors). Release numbers reported authors were approximately double those published literature, causing studies' sets differ dramatically. The results show that improved communication among researchers practitioners is needed ensure access current prevent duplication of efforts. recommend that: i) planned, ongoing, unpublished work be integrated as best possible reviews; ii) expert perspectives included alongside quantitative measures; iii) online tools more promote communication; iv) an catalogue established facilitate awareness contact researchers; v) standardization reporting increased. provide practical pathways actions help achieve these recommendations. These review practices can benefit both reviewers increasing quality accuracy reviews.