CERESResearch Repository

Building transparency, credibility and trust in evidence synthesis practice: why editorial standards and policies matter

dc.contributor.authorRoth, Nicolas
dc.contributor.authorYang, Yefeng
dc.contributor.authorCoulon, Frederic
dc.contributor.authorNieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
dc.contributor.authorCovaci, Adrian
dc.date.accessioned2026-05-07T09:12:25Z
dc.date.available2026-05-07T09:12:25Z
dc.date.freetoread2026-05-07
dc.date.issued2026-04
dc.date.pubOnline2026-04-22
dc.description.abstractEditorial 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.
dc.description.journalNameEnvironment International
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.identifier.citationRoth N, Yang Y, Coulon F, et al., (2026) Building transparency, credibility and trust in evidence synthesis practice: why editorial standards and policies matter. Environment International, Volume 210, April 2026, Article number 110216en_UK
dc.identifier.eissn1873-6750
dc.identifier.elementsID870099
dc.identifier.issn0160-4120
dc.identifier.paperNo110216
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2026.110216
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/25217
dc.identifier.volumeNo210
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevieren_UK
dc.publisher.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412026001741?via%3Dihub
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subject4206 Public Healthen_UK
dc.subject42 Health Sciencesen_UK
dc.subjectEnvironmental Sciencesen_UK
dc.subjectEditorial policiesen_UK
dc.subjectPublishing standardsen_UK
dc.subjectQuality controlen_UK
dc.subjectReproducibilityen_UK
dc.subjectReview literatureen_UK
dc.subjectEvidence-based practiceen_UK
dc.subject.meshEditorial Policiesen_UK
dc.subject.meshPublishingen_UK
dc.subject.meshSystematic Reviews as Topicen_UK
dc.subject.meshTrusten_UK
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Resultsen_UK
dc.titleBuilding transparency, credibility and trust in evidence synthesis practice: why editorial standards and policies matteren_UK
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Building_transparency_credibility-2026.pdf
Size:
1,008.61 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description: