Much of the scientific literature in existence today is based on model systems and case studies, which help to split research into manageable blocks. The impact of this research can be greatly increased in meta-analyses that combine individual studies published over time to identify patterns across studies; patterns that may go undetected by smaller studies and that may not be the main subject of investigation. However, many potentially useful studies fail to provide sufficient data (typically means, true sample sizes, and measures of variability) to permit meta-analysis. Authors of primary research studies should provide these summary statistics as a minimum, and editors should require them to do so. By putting policies in place that require these summary statistics to be included, or even those that require raw data, editors and authors can maximize the legacy and impact of the research they publish beyond that of their initial target audience.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Bernes, C., K.A. Bråthen, B.C. Forbes, A. Hofgaard, J. Moen, and J.D. Speed. 2013. What are the impacts of reindeer/caribou (Rangifer tarandus L.) on arctic and alpine vegetation? A systematic review protocol. Environmental Evidence 2: 6. doi:10.1186/2047-2382-2-6.
BMJ. 2010a. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340: 332. doi:10.1136/bmj.c332.
BMJ. 2010b. The new CONSORT statement. BMJ 340: c1432. doi:10.1136/bmj.c1432.
Borenstein, M., L.V. Hedges, J.P. Higgins, and H.R. Rothstein. 2011. Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-05724-7.
Burgess, S., I.R. White, M. Resch-Rigon, and A.M. Wood. 2013. Combining multiple imputation and meta-analysis with individual participant data. Statistics in Medicine 32(26): 4499–4514. doi:10.1002/sim.5844.
Fisher, R.A. 1932. Statistical methods for research workers. London: Oliver & Boyd. ISBN 0-05-002170-2.
Gibson, C.A., B.W. Bailey, M.J. Carper, J.D. LeCheminant, E.P. Kirk, G. Huang, K. Drowatzky DuBose, and J.E. Donnelly. 2006. Author contacts for retrieval of data for a meta-analysis on exercise and diet restriction. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 22(02): 267–270. doi:10.1017/S0266462306051105.
Glass, G.V. 1976. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher 5(10): 3–8.
Gurevitch, J., L.L. Morrow, A. Wallace, and J.S. Walsh. 1992. A meta-analysis of competition in field experiments. The American Naturalist 140(4): 539–572.
Haddaway, N.R., A. Burden, C.D. Evans, J.R. Healey, D.L. Jones, S.E. Dalrymple, and A.S. Pullin. 2014. Evaluating effects of land management on greenhouse gas fluxes and carbon balances in boreo-temperate lowland peatland systems. Environmental Evidence 3: 5. doi:10.1186/2047-2382-3-5.
Harris, C., L.V. Hedges, and J.C. Valentine. 2009. Handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. ISBN 978-0-87154-163-5.
Higgins, J.P.T., and S. Green. 2011. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. Updated March 2011. Retrieved March 1, 2014, from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
Jones, D. 1995. Meta-analysis: weighing the evidence. Statistics in Medicine 14: 137–149. doi:10.1002/sim.4780140206.
Lau, J., E.M. Antman, J. Jimenez-Silva, B. Kupelnick, F. Mosteller, and T.C. Chalmers. 1992. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 327(4): 248–254. doi:10.1056/NEJM199207233270406.
O’Rourke, K. 2007. An historical perspective on meta-analysis: dealing quantitatively with varying study results. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 100(12): 579–582.
Pullin, A.S., and T.M. Knight. 2001. Effectiveness in conservation practice: Pointers from medicine and public health. Conservation Biology 15(1): 50–54. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2001.99499.x.
Pullin, A.S., and G.B. Stewart. 2006. Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology 20(6): 1647–1656. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x.
Pullin, A.S., M. Bangpan, S. Dalrymple, K. Dickson, N.R. Haddaway, J.R. Healey, H. Hauari, N. Hockley, et al. 2013. Human well-being impacts of terrestrial protected areas. Environmental Evidence 2: 19. doi:10.1186/2047-2382-2-19.
Rantalainen, M.L., J. Haimi, H. Fritze, T. Pennanen, and H. Setala. 2008. Soil decomposer community as a model system in studying the effects of habitat fragmentation and habitat corridors. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 40(4): 853–863. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2007.11.008.
Thomson Reuters. 2013. 2012 Journal Citation Reports® Science Edition. Accessed October, 2013.
Tummers, B. 2006. DataThief III. Retrieved March 1, 2014, from http://datathief.org.
Vines, T.H., A.Y.K. Albert, R.L. Andrew, F. Débarre, D.G. Bock, M.T. Franklin, K.J. Gilbert, J.-S. Moore, et al. 2014. The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age. Current Biology 24: 94–97. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.014.
Wiebe, N., B. Vandermeer, R.W. Platt, T.P. Klassen, D. Moher, and N.J. Barrowman. 2006. A systematic review identifies a lack of standardization in methods for handling missing variance data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 59: 342–353. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.08.017.
I thank Claes Bernes, Ruth Lewis, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on a draft version of the manuscript.
About this article
Cite this article
Haddaway, N.R. Maximizing Legacy and Impact of Primary Research: A Call for Better Reporting of Results. AMBIO 43, 703–706 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0535-6
- Systematic review
- Data reporting
- Quantitative synthesis
- Missing data