Systematic reviews as object to study relevance assessment processes

Ingeborg Jäger-Dengler-Harles, Tamara Heck, Marc Rittberger
{"title":"Systematic reviews as object to study relevance assessment processes","authors":"Ingeborg Jäger-Dengler-Harles, Tamara Heck, Marc Rittberger","doi":"10.47989/irisic2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Systematic reviews are a method to synthesise research results for evidence-based decision-making on a specific question. Processes of information seeking and behaviour play a crucial role and might intensively influence the outcomes of a review. This paper proposes an approach to understand the relevance assessment and decision-making of researchers that conduct systematic reviews. Method. A systematic review was conducted to build up a database for text-based qualitative analyses of researchers’ decision-making in review processes. Analysis. The analysis focuses on the selection process of retrieved articles and introduces the method to investigate relevance assessment processes of researchers. Results. There are different methods to conduct reviews in research, and relevance assessment of documents within those processes is neither one-directional nor standardised. Research on information behaviour of researchers involved in those reviews has not looked at relevance assessment steps and their influence in a review’s outcomes. Conclusions. A reason for the varieties and inconsistencies of review types might be that information seeking and relevance assessment are much more complex and researchers might not be able to draw upon their concrete decisions. This paper proposes a research study to investigate researcher behaviour while synthesising research results for evidence-based decision-making.","PeriodicalId":344892,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of ISIC: the information behaviour conference Pretoria, South Africa, 28th September to 1st October, 2020","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of ISIC: the information behaviour conference Pretoria, South Africa, 28th September to 1st October, 2020","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47989/irisic2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction. Systematic reviews are a method to synthesise research results for evidence-based decision-making on a specific question. Processes of information seeking and behaviour play a crucial role and might intensively influence the outcomes of a review. This paper proposes an approach to understand the relevance assessment and decision-making of researchers that conduct systematic reviews. Method. A systematic review was conducted to build up a database for text-based qualitative analyses of researchers’ decision-making in review processes. Analysis. The analysis focuses on the selection process of retrieved articles and introduces the method to investigate relevance assessment processes of researchers. Results. There are different methods to conduct reviews in research, and relevance assessment of documents within those processes is neither one-directional nor standardised. Research on information behaviour of researchers involved in those reviews has not looked at relevance assessment steps and their influence in a review’s outcomes. Conclusions. A reason for the varieties and inconsistencies of review types might be that information seeking and relevance assessment are much more complex and researchers might not be able to draw upon their concrete decisions. This paper proposes a research study to investigate researcher behaviour while synthesising research results for evidence-based decision-making.
以系统评价为对象,研究相关评价过程
介绍。系统评价是一种综合研究结果的方法,用于对特定问题进行循证决策。寻求信息的过程和行为起着至关重要的作用,并可能强烈地影响审查的结果。本文提出了一种方法来理解进行系统综述的研究人员的相关性评估和决策。方法。通过系统综述,建立基于文本的研究人员评审决策定性分析数据库。分析。分析的重点是检索文章的选择过程,并介绍了研究研究者的相关性评估过程的方法。结果。在研究中进行评审有不同的方法,在这些过程中对文件的相关性评估既不是单向的,也不是标准化的。对参与这些审查的研究人员信息行为的研究没有考虑到相关性评估步骤及其对审查结果的影响。结论。评论类型的多样性和不一致性的一个原因可能是信息寻找和相关性评估要复杂得多,研究人员可能无法利用他们的具体决定。本文提出了一项研究性研究,在综合研究成果的同时调查研究人员的行为,为循证决策提供依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信