» Articles » PMID: 29339933

Roles for Librarians in Systematic Reviews: a Scoping Review

Overview
Date 2018 Jan 18
PMID 29339933
Citations 34
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: What roles do librarians and information professionals play in conducting systematic reviews? Librarians are increasingly called upon to be involved in systematic reviews, but no study has considered all the roles librarians can perform. This inventory of existing and emerging roles aids in defining librarians' systematic reviews services.

Methods: For this scoping review, the authors conducted controlled vocabulary and text-word searches in the PubMed; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; and CINAHL databases. We separately searched for articles published in the the and We also text-word searched Medical Library Association annual meeting poster and paper abstracts.

Results: We identified 18 different roles filled by librarians and other information professionals in conducting systematic reviews from 310 different articles, book chapters, and presented papers and posters. Some roles were well known such as searching, source selection, and teaching. Other less documented roles included planning, question formulation, and peer review. We summarize these different roles and provide an accompanying bibliography of references for in-depth descriptions of these roles.

Conclusion: Librarians play central roles in systematic review teams, including roles that go beyond searching. This scoping review should encourage librarians who are fulfilling roles that are not captured here to document their roles in journal articles and poster and paper presentations.

Citing Articles

ChatGPT, Python, and Microsoft Excel.

Sbampato K, Arruda H, Silva E J Med Libr Assoc. 2025; 113(1):110-112.

PMID: 39975489 PMC: 11835046. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2025.2065.


Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report.

Farris D, Lebo R, Price C J Med Libr Assoc. 2024; 112(4):357-363.

PMID: 39429500 PMC: 11486078. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1930.


Large-scale systematic review support for guideline development in diabetes precision medicine.

Bjorklund M, Aronsson K J Med Libr Assoc. 2024; 112(3):275-280.

PMID: 39308915 PMC: 11412120. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1863.


Effect of librarian collaboration on otolaryngology systematic review and meta-analysis quality.

Whitney R, Shih M, Gordis T, Nguyen S, Meyer T, Brennan E J Med Libr Assoc. 2024; 112(3):261-274.

PMID: 39308914 PMC: 11412119. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1774.


Exploring librarians' practices when teaching advanced searching for knowledge synthesis: results from an online survey.

Bradley-Ridout G, Parker R, Sikora L, Quaiattini A, Fuller K, Nevison M J Med Libr Assoc. 2024; 112(3):238-249.

PMID: 39308911 PMC: 11412128. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1870.


References
1.
Peters M, Godfrey C, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares C . Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015; 13(3):141-6. DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050. View

2.
Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C . Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994; 309(6964):1286-91. PMC: 2541778. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.309.6964.1286. View

3.
Greyson D . Non-biomedical sources for systematic reviews of pharmaceutical policy. J Med Libr Assoc. 2010; 98(1):85-7. PMC: 2801981. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.98.1.021. View

4.
Limani P, Tschuor C, Gort L, Balmer B, Gu A, Ceresa C . Nonsurgical Strategies in Patients With NET Liver Metastases: A Protocol of Four Systematic Reviews. JMIR Res Protoc. 2014; 3(1):e9. PMC: 3961806. DOI: 10.2196/resprot.2893. View

5.
Bramer W, Giustini D, Kramer B . Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study. Syst Rev. 2016; 5:39. PMC: 4772334. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0215-7. View