Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews

Abstract

Objective: A critical element in conducting a systematic review is the identification of studies. To date, very little empirical evidence has been reported on whether the presence of a librarian or information professional can contribute to the quality of the final product. The goal of this study was to compare the reporting rigor of the literature searching component of systematic reviews with and without the help of a librarian.Method: Systematic reviews published from 2002 to 2011 in the twenty highest impact factor pediatrics journals were collected from MEDLINE. Corresponding authors were contacted via an email survey to determine if a librarian was involved, the role that the librarian played, and functions that the librarian performed. The reviews were scored independently by two reviewers using a fifteen-item checklist.Results: There were 186 reviews that met the inclusion criteria, and 44% of the authors indicated the involvement of a librarian in conducting the systematic review. With the presence of a librarian as coauthor or team member, the mean checklist score was 8.40, compared to 6.61 (p,0.001) for reviews without a librarian.Conclusions: Findings indicate that having a librarian as a coauthor or team member correlates with a higher score in the literature searching component of systematic reviews.Keywords: Systematic Review, Librarian, Critical Appraisal, Literature Search, Reporting There is ample literature assessing the quality of systematic reviews across many disciplines [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16], and a common theme that has emerged from a number of these studies has been the need for improving the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Many studies have advocated for and described various roles that librarians and information professionals could play on a review team [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. Several standards and organizations also suggest that a librarian or information professional be involved in the review process [27][28][29][30]. Documents produced by the Campbell Collaboration and a recent Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) Knowledge Synthesis grant competition strongly recommend that an information professional or librarian be included among the members of a review team [31,32].However, to date, there has been very little empirical evidence on whether the presence of a librarian or information professional on a systematic review team contributes to the quality of a systematic review. Golder et al. found that only a very small percentage of reviews reported their search strategy with enough detail to be reproducible, and of those with reproducible searches, nearly half employed an information professional [33]. In the same study, the authors noted that literature searches performed by information professionals tended to be carried out

Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources

“…However, the time saved in physically searching for evidence must now be spent in carefully planning searches that make use of complex syntax and search facilities to mine the textual data within titles, abstracts, keywords, and full texts. Accordingly, collaboration with librarians, as information experts in these complex literature search processes, has been shown to benefit study quality . In evidence syntheses, online databases should “form the backbone of any comprehensive literature search.…”

Novel advanced scoping meta-review methodology for defining a graduate level textbook in an emerging subject area.

“…The involvement of library and academic staff in a carefully developed subject mapping exercise, structured by the use of the advanced scoping meta-review methodology provided an ideal opportunity to achieve a fruitful collaboration. A recent study by Meert, Torabi and Costella (2016) confirms the positive impact of the inclusion of a librarian or information professional as a member of a systematic review team on the outcome of the review process. Further development of this work may be to create a more structured and sustainable collaborative model as suggested by Swinkels, Briddon and Hall (2006).…”

Topic search filters: a systematic scoping review

“…In recent years, the specialist searching skills of information professionals, especially those with a background in health, have been increasingly acknowledged as important in the teaching of evidence-based practice and a critical component in the creation of high-quality evidence-based products such as systematic reviews (Meert, Torabi, & Costella, 2016), health technology assessments and clinical practice guidelines (Cruse & Protzko, 2014). This recognition has led to increased participation in health care research work, often in the role of co-author (Rethlefsen, Farrell, Osterhaus Trzasko, & Brigham, 2015).…”