Trevor Riley

Deduplicates bibliographic citations from multiple sources while preserving customizable metadata, supporting data-driven search strategy development and evidence synthesis reporting. Search results can be analyzed using plots and tables, and imported or exported in 'RIS' and 'CSV' formats. An interactive 'shiny' application is included for exploratory use.

Evidence synthesis findings hinge upon well-designed, effective search strategies. When developing these strategies, evidence synthesis teams make multiple decisions (e.g., selecting information sources, developing search string architecture, and picking supplementary search methods) that directly affect the breadth of discovered evidence and thus evidence synthesis outcomes. Despite the number of decisions required when developing search strategies, limited guidance exists to inform these decisions using a data-driven approach. To help address this gap, we developed CiteSource, an R package and accompanying Shiny application, that supports data-driven search strategy development and reporting. CiteSource allows users to assign and retain metadata across three custom fields: source, label , and string to indicate where the records were found, what method or string was used to find them, and whether they were included after screening. CiteSource allows users to visually map the overlap between sets of records, create data summaries of citation records, and export citation records with the newly assigned metadata. CiteSource’s analysis and visualization outputs can be harnessed for a variety of use cases, such as optimizing literature source selection, honing and understanding the effectiveness of search strings, and evaluating the impacts of literature sources and supplementary search methods. Overall, CiteSource provides a tool for evidence synthesizers to make informed data-driven decisions that boost the efficiency, rigor, and transparency of search strategies and associated reporting.

Background: Combined impacts from anthropogenic pressures and climate change threaten coastal ecosystems and their capacity to protect communities from hazards. One approach towards improving coastal protection is to implement “nature-based solutions” (NBS), which are actions working with nature to benefit nature and humans. Despite recent increases in global implementation of NBS projects for coastal protection, substantial gaps exist in our understanding of NBS performance. To help fill this gap, we systematically mapped the global evidence base on the ecological, physical, economic, and social performance of NBS interventions related to coastal protection. We focused on active NBS interventions, such as restoring or creating habitat, adding structure, or modifying sediment in six shallow biogenic ecosystems: salt marsh, seagrass, kelp forest, mangrove, coral reef, and shellfish reef. Methods: We identified potentially relevant articles on the performance of NBS for coastal protection using predefined and tested search strategies across two indexing platforms, one bibliographic database, two open discovery citation indexes, one web-based search engine, and a novel literature discovery tool. We also searched 45 organizational websites for literature and solicited literature from 66 subject matter experts. Potentially relevant articles were deduplicated and then screened by title and abstract with assistance from a machine learning algorithm. Following title and abstract screening, we conducted full text screening, extracted relevant metadata into a predefined codebook, and analyzed the evidence base to determine the distribution and abundance of evidence and answer our research questions on NBS performance. Results: Our search captured > 37,000 articles, of which 252 met our eligibility criteria for relevance to NBS performance for coastal protection and were included in the systematic map. Evidence stemmed from 31 countries and increased from the 1980s through the 2020s. Active NBS interventions for coastal protection were most often implemented in salt marshes (45%), mangrove forests (26%), and shellfish reefs (20%), whereas there were fewer NBS studies in seagrass meadows (4%), coral reefs (4%), or kelp beds (< 1%). Performance evaluations of NBS were typically conducted using observational or experimental methods at local spatial scales and over short temporal scales (< 1 year to 5 years). Evidence clusters existed for several types of NBS interventions, including restoration and addition of structures (e.g., those consisting of artificial, hybrid, or natural materials), yet evidence gaps existed for NBS interventions like alteration of invasive species. Evaluations of NBS performance commonly focused on ecological (e.g., species and population, habitat, community) and physical (e.g., waves, sediment and morphology) outcomes, whereas pronounced evidence gaps existed for economic (e.g., living standards, capital) and social (e.g., basic infrastructure, health) outcomes. Conclusions: This systematic map highlights evidence clusters and evidence gaps related to the performance of active NBS interventions for coastal protection in shallow, biogenic ecosystems. The synthesized evidence base will help guide future research and management of NBS for coastal protection so that active interventions can be designed, sited, constructed, monitored, and adaptively managed to maximize co-benefits. Promising avenues for future research and management initiatives include implementing broad-scale spatial and temporal monitoring of NBS in multidisciplinary teams to examine not only ecological and physical outcomes but also economic and social outcomes, as well as conducting further synthesis on evidence clusters that may reveal measures of effect for specific NBS interventions. Since NBS can deliver multiple benefits, measuring a diverse suite of response variables, especially those related to ecosystem function, as well as social and economic responses, may help justify and improve societal benefits of NBS. Such an approach can help ensure that NBS can be strategically harnessed and managed to meet coastal protection goals and provide co-benefits for nature and people.

Background: Shallow, tropical coral reefs face compounding threats from climate change, habitat degradation due to coastal development and pollution, impacts from storms and sea-level rise, and pulse disturbances like blast fishing, mining, dredging, and ship groundings that reduce reef height and complexity. One approach toward restoring coral reef physical structure from such impacts is deploying built structures of artificial, natural, or hybrid (both artificial and natural) origin. Built structures range from designed modules and repurposed materials to underwater sculptures and intentionally placed natural rocks. Restoration practitioners and coastal managers increasingly consider incorporating – and in many cases have already begun to incorporate – built structures into coral reef-related applications, yet synthesized evidence on the ecological (coral-related; e.g., coral growth, coral survival) and physical performance of built structures in coral ecosystems across a variety of contexts (e.g., restoration, coastal protection, mitigation, tourism) is not readily available to guide decisions. To help fill this gap and inform management decisions, we systematically mapped the global distribution and abundance of published evidence on the ecological (coral-related) and physical performance of built structure interventions in shallow (≤ 30 m), tropical (35°N to 35°S) coral ecosystems. Methods: To identify potentially relevant articles, we used predefined and tested strategies to search two indexing platforms, one bibliographic database, two open discovery citation indexes, one web-based search engine, one novel literature discovery tool, 19 organizational websites, and information requested from stakeholders. Discovered articles were screened according to preset eligibility criteria first by title and abstract and second by full text. Articles included during full text screening were coded to extract metadata following a predefined framework. We analyzed and visualized the evidence base to answer our primary and secondary research questions and to identify knowledge clusters and gaps. Findings are reported in a narrative synthesis. Results: Our search discovered > 20,000 potentially relevant unique articles, of which 258 were included in the systematic map. The evidence base spans 50 countries, and the volume of evidence increased over the past five decades. Built structures were most commonly installed for coral restoration (61%) or coastal protection (12%). Structures were predominately characterized as artificial (87%), with fewer hybrid or natural interventions. Evidence clusters existed for intentionally designed artificial structures and outcomes associated with coral-related ecological performance, including coral mortality, growth, recruitment, cover, and diversity. Pronounced evidence gaps occurred at the intersection of several ecological coral-related performance outcomes (e.g., connectivity, microbiome) across all types of built structures; gaps also existed across most ecological coral-related outcomes for artwork and repurposed artificial structures. Physical performance of built structures was most frequently evaluated for outcomes related to waves (n = 14) and sediment and morphology (n = 11) with pervasive evidence gaps across other outcomes like storm surge and water level. Conclusions: While the systematic map highlighted several evidence clusters, it also revealed pronounced evidence gaps surrounding the coral-related ecological and physical performance of built structures in coral ecosystems. The compiled evidence base will help inform policy, management, and future consideration of built structures in reef-related applications, including habitat restoration, environmental mitigation, and coastal protection. Map findings also point to promising future research avenues, such as investigating seascape-scale ecological effects of and the physical performance of built structures.

Background: Anthropogenic pressures and climate change threaten the capacity of ecosystems to deliver a variety of services, including protecting coastal communities from hazards like flooding and erosion. Human interventions aim to buffer against or overcome these threats by providing physical protection for existing coastal infrastructure and communities, along with added ecological, social, or economic co-benefits. These interventions are a type of nature-based solution (NBS), broadly defined as actions working with nature to address societal challenges while also providing benefits for human well-being, biodiversity, and resilience. Despite the increasing popularity of NBS for coastal protection, sometimes in lieu of traditional hardened shorelines (e.g., oyster reefs instead of bulkheads), gaps remain in our understanding of whether common NBS interventions for coastal protection perform as intended. To help fill these knowledge gaps, we aim to identify, collate, and map the evidence base surrounding the performance of active NBS interventions related to coastal protection across a suite of ecological, physical, social, and economic outcomes in salt marsh, seagrass, kelp, mangrove, shellfish reef, and coral reef systems. The resulting evidence base will highlight the current knowledge on NBS performance and inform future uses of NBS meant for coastal protection.Methods: Searches for primary literature on performance of NBS for coastal protection in shallow, biogenic ecosystems will be conducted using a predefined list of indexing platforms, bibliographic databases, open discovery citation indexes, and organizational databases and websites, as well as an online search engine and novel literature discovery tool. All searches will be conducted in English and will be restricted to literature published from 1980 to present. Resulting literature will be screened against set inclusion criteria (i.e., population, intervention, outcome, study type) at the level of title and abstract followed by full text. Screening will be facilitated by a web-based active learning tool that incorporates user feedback via machine learning to prioritize articles for review. Metadata will be extracted from articles that meet inclusion criteria and summarized in a narrative report detailing the distribution and abundance of evidence surrounding NBS performance, including evidence clusters, evidence gaps, and the precision and sensitivity of the search strategy.