ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2017
A competency framework for librarians involved in systematic reviews.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Taking it a step farther: acknowledging librarians' systematic review work in the promotion or tenure process.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2026Article
- Article
- Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Exploring librarians' practices when teaching advanced searching for knowledge synthesis: results from an online survey.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Large-scale systematic review support for guideline development in diabetes precision medicine.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- A decade of systematic reviews: an assessment of Weill Cornell Medicine's systematic review service.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2023Article
- Addressing challenges with systematic review teams through effective communication: a case report.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Use of a search summary table to improve systematic review search methods, results, and efficiency.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- A core competency model for clinical informationists.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Educational interventions to improve literature searching skills in the health sciences: a scoping review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- Burnout among medical and health sciences information professionals who support systematic reviews: an exploratory study.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe project identified a set of core competencies for librarians who are involved in systematic reviews.
methodsA team of seven informationists with broad systematic review experience examined existing systematic review standards, conducted a literature search, and used their own expertise to identify core competencies and skills that are necessary to undertake various roles in systematic review projects.
resultsThe team identified a total of six competencies for librarian involvement in systematic reviews: "Systematic review foundations," "Process management and communication," "Research methodology," "Comprehensive searching," "Data management," and "Reporting." Within each competency are the associated skills and knowledge pieces (indicators). Competence can be measured using an adaptation of Miller's Pyramid for Clinical Assessment, either through self-assessment or identification of formal assessment instruments.
conclusionsThe Systematic Review Competencies Framework provides a standards-based, flexible way for librarians and organizations to identify areas of competence and areas in need of development to build capacity for systematic review integration. The framework can be used to identify or develop appropriate assessment tools and to target skill development opportunities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.