ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2017
Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Librarian involvement on knowledge synthesis articles and its relationship to article citation count and Journal Impact Factor.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2024Article
- Large-scale systematic review support for guideline development in diabetes precision medicine.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Bibliometric analysis of librarian involvement in systematic reviews at the University of Alberta.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2024Article
- Recognizing the value of meta-research and making it easier to find.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2023Article
- The relationship between methodological quality and the use of retracted publications in evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Health sciences and medical librarians conducting research and their experiences asking for co-authorship.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- The case of the disappearing librarians: analyzing documentation of librarians' contributions to systematic reviews.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- Systematic review support received and needed by researchers: a survey of libraries supporting Ontario medical schools.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2021Article
- Addressing challenges with systematic review teams through effective communication: a case report.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Assessing the roles and challenges of librarians in dental systematic and scoping reviews.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
- Burnout among medical and health sciences information professionals who support systematic reviews: an exploratory study.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2020Article
- Building capacity for librarian support and addressing collaboration challenges by formalizing library systematic review services.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2019Article
- Transforming the systematic review service: a team-based model to support the educational needs of researchers.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWhile many librarians have been asked to participate in systematic reviews with researchers, often these researchers are not familiar with the systematic review process or the appropriate role for librarians. The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges and barriers that librarians face when collaborating on systematic reviews. To take a wider view of the whole process of collaborating on systematic reviews, the authors deliberately focused on interpersonal and methodological issues other than searching itself.
methodsTo characterize the biggest challenges that librarians face while collaborating on systematic review projects, we used a web-based survey. The thirteen-item survey included seventeen challenges grouped into two categories: methodological and interpersonal. Participants were required to indicate the frequency and difficulty of the challenges listed. Open-ended questions allowed survey participants to describe challenges not listed in the survey and to describe strategies used to overcome challenges.
resultsOf the 17 challenges listed in the survey, 8 were reported as common by over 40% of respondents. These included methodological issues around having too broad or narrow research questions, lacking eligibility criteria, having unclear research questions, and not following established methods. The remaining challenges were interpersonal, including issues around student-led projects and the size of the research team. Of the top 8 most frequent challenges, 5 were also ranked as most difficult to handle. Open-ended responses underscored many of the challenges included in the survey and revealed several additional challenges.
conclusionsThese results suggest that the most frequent and challenging issues relate to development of the research question and general communication with team members. Clear protocols for collaboration on systematic reviews, as well as a culture of mentorship, can help librarians prevent and address these challenges.
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.