We provide an intake form for review teams to complete before the initial consultation ( Appendix B). This email points to the library's systematic review guide, which contains links to core articles about the process and information on the different support models offered at Galter, both consultative and collaborative. To close these early knowledge gaps, we start by providing and requesting information using a preconsultation email template, available in the toolkit ( Appendix A). As librarians, we are initially unaware of the topic's potential for a review and the reviewers' understanding of systematic review process. The requesters know they want to conduct a review on a topic of interest and may have a vague idea of some of the mile markers to reach on the way to completing that review. Įach review project starts with knowledge gaps for each member of the team. Thus, in this case report, we describe a toolkit Galter librarians use to manage time, resources, and expectations in the systematic review process. As we take on multiple roles and perform many tasks, often simultaneously and for multiple reviews, time, resources, and team management become significant challenges. This reflects the reality at Galter, as a research librarian often spends full days working on systematic review–related tasks. The authors surveyed librarians and found they averaged around four hours for the initial consultations, over five hours on search strategy development and implementation, three hours on documentation, and two hours on writing. found systematic review teams can invest up to 219 hours on a review. Taking on the roles of instructor, methods expert, expert searcher, reference manager, document supplier, data manager, and author for each full collaborative review contributes to the time and resource-intensive requirements of systematic reviews. Coauthorship is expected when a librarian serves as collaborator rather than a consultant. Librarians who partner with review teams as full collaborators commonly satisfy the criteria for authorship set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Galter librarians who assist teams under the full collaboration model perform tasks that include assisting teams with formulating a research question searching for possible existing systematic or scoping reviews, including protocols, on the topic identifying information sources and developing sensitive search strategies for each source deduplicating search results and delivering them to the screening platform assisting with full-text retrieval documenting the search process and writing the search methods for the protocol and manuscript. Review teams run their own searches and perform all tasks related to their review with minimal input from the librarian. Teams that accept support under the consultant model meet with a librarian for a one-hour consultation where we discuss the process, tools, and provide tips on developing a comprehensive search. Galter Health Sciences Library and Learning Center offers two support models for systematic review teams: the consultant model and the full collaboration model. In 2018, Spencer and Eldredge identified eighteen unique roles. reported ten roles that librarians may perform as members of review teams. This is evident in librarians' increasing involvement in systematic review projects as experts recognize that librarian involvement helps produce high-quality reviews. The proliferation of systematic reviews has substantially impacted library operations and activities as librarians support, collaborate, and perform more tasks in the systematic review process. That number jumped to over 22,300 in 2019. In 2000, 279 citations in PubMed had “systematic review” in their titles.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |