ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2024
Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
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
Background: Librarians play an important role on systematic review teams because of their expertise in information organization, database searching, and records management. Many systematic review training opportunities exist, but not all are tailored to the needs of librarians. The Medical Library Association, along with a workgroup of experts on systematic reviews and review services, developed a Systematic Review Services Specialization (SRSS) that was launched in 2022. One of the required courses in the specialization was developed by the authors, who set out to build a value-added curriculum that would provide essential searching skills for librarians working in evidence synthesis domains. Case Presentation: The authors present a case report on creating a framework for developing a new course in the Medical Library Association's Systematic Review Services Specialization. The objectives of the course were intended to align with six systematic review competencies for librarians developed and published by a group of health science librarians from the University of Michigan in 2017, which include 1) conducting a reference interview, 2) performing preliminary searches, 3) selecting appropriate resources to search, 4) building an extensive, comprehensive, and documented search strategy, 5) peer reviewing search strategies, and 6) reporting search methods. With these objectives in mind, the instructors created four separate modules and an activity. Conclusion: Systematic review skills for librarians are essential to many health science library jobs since librarians are considered important collaborators within systematic review teams. Through eleven cohorts of the course held over 2022-2024, the authors constructed and delivered a comprehensive curriculum.
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.