Last updated: 2018-06-12

workflowr checks: (Click a bullet for more information)

• ✔ R Markdown file: up-to-date

  Great! Since the R Markdown file has been committed to the Git repository, you know the exact version of the code that produced these results.

• ✔ Repository version: 5999b3d

  Great! You are using Git for version control. Tracking code development and connecting the code version to the results is critical for reproducibility. The version displayed above was the version of the Git repository at the time these results were generated.
  
  Note that you need to be careful to ensure that all relevant files for the analysis have been committed to Git prior to generating the results (you can use wflow_publish or wflow_git_commit). workflowr only checks the R Markdown file, but you know if there are other scripts or data files that it depends on. Below is the status of the Git repository when the results were generated:

  
  Ignored files:
      Ignored:    .Rhistory
      Ignored:    .Rproj.user/
      Ignored:    R/
      Ignored:    man/
      Ignored:    manuscript/
  
  

  Note that any generated files, e.g. HTML, png, CSS, etc., are not included in this status report because it is ok for generated content to have uncommitted changes.

Expand here to see past versions:

File	Version	Author	Date	Message
html	5999b3d	egouldo	2018-06-12	re-build site
Rmd	4343bc0	egouldo	2018-06-12	update with PRISMA-P checklist approach
Rmd	2d73b50	egouldo	2018-06-12	Update preregistration intent
html	9cdb873	egouldo	2018-05-08	Build site.
Rmd	45e51ff	egouldo	2018-05-08	update landing page with links to docs
html	ebd9f41	egouldo	2018-05-08	Build site.
html	0188b05	egouldo	2018-05-08	Build site.
Rmd	21434a4	egouldo	2018-05-08	add workflowr infrastructure

---

Welcome to the portal for my systematic literature review on reproducibility in ecology and conservation. All project-related materials are stored and openly accessible on the OSF.

Pre-registration

I will be following the CEE guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. This involves the development of a review protocol. I will also be following the PRISMA-P [@Moher2015] checklist for reporting items. I opted to use the PRISMA-P checklist in addition to the CEE guidelines, because of its detail / specificity in terms of data management of study records and also guideance for what to look out for in synthesis.

Following the CEE process for conducting SR’s, the protocol will be submitted for review and registration with the Journal of Environmental Evidence. I will also use the OSF pre-registration process, “registered report protocol preregistration”. The other option is to select the “Prereg” challenge (but the article must be published by December 31, 2018 to receive the $1000).

From protocol design, scoping, analysis and review:

1. Review Protocol- outlining the protocol for implementing the review
2. Scoping Exercise- refining the search strategy

---

This reproducible R Markdown analysis was created with workflowr 1.0.1

---