Systematic review support received and needed by researchers: a survey of libraries supporting Ontario medical schools.

Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.29173/jchla29571
Sandra McKeown, Zuhaib M Mir, Jennifer A Ritonja, Eleftherios Soleas
{"title":"Systematic review support received and needed by researchers: a survey of libraries supporting Ontario medical schools.","authors":"Sandra McKeown, Zuhaib M Mir, Jennifer A Ritonja, Eleftherios Soleas","doi":"10.29173/jchla29571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Finding efficient ways to meet the growing demand for library systematic review support is imperative for facilitating the production of high-quality research. The objectives of this study were threefold: 1) to ascertain the systematic review support provided by health sciences libraries at Ontario medical schools and their affiliated hospitals, 2) to determine the perceived educational needs by researchers at these institutions, and 3) to assess the potential usefulness of freely available, online educational modules for researchers that discuss all stages of the systematic review process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional survey in June and July of 2020. Data was analyzed and presented using median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous measures, and in proportions for categorical measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>13 of 19 libraries invited provided usable data. Most libraries spent more time supporting systematic reviews via collaboration and participation than by providing educational support. The perceived needs of library users were contrary to the perceived gaps in researcher support provided by the library/institution. All libraries reported they would find freely available, online educational modules useful for training researchers.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The next steps for our inter-professional research team will be to develop freely available, online education modules that introduce researchers to all stages of the systematic review process. These modules cannot replace the value that direct support from librarians, biostatisticians or methodology experts can provide, however, they may offer a more efficient way for libraries to familiarize researchers and trainees with best practices and universally accepted reporting guidelines for performing a high-quality review.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9327595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/jchla29571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Finding efficient ways to meet the growing demand for library systematic review support is imperative for facilitating the production of high-quality research. The objectives of this study were threefold: 1) to ascertain the systematic review support provided by health sciences libraries at Ontario medical schools and their affiliated hospitals, 2) to determine the perceived educational needs by researchers at these institutions, and 3) to assess the potential usefulness of freely available, online educational modules for researchers that discuss all stages of the systematic review process.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in June and July of 2020. Data was analyzed and presented using median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous measures, and in proportions for categorical measures.

Results: 13 of 19 libraries invited provided usable data. Most libraries spent more time supporting systematic reviews via collaboration and participation than by providing educational support. The perceived needs of library users were contrary to the perceived gaps in researcher support provided by the library/institution. All libraries reported they would find freely available, online educational modules useful for training researchers.

Discussion: The next steps for our inter-professional research team will be to develop freely available, online education modules that introduce researchers to all stages of the systematic review process. These modules cannot replace the value that direct support from librarians, biostatisticians or methodology experts can provide, however, they may offer a more efficient way for libraries to familiarize researchers and trainees with best practices and universally accepted reporting guidelines for performing a high-quality review.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

分享
查看原文
研究人员获得和需要的系统综述支持:对支持安大略医学院的图书馆的调查。
导言:要促进高质量的研究成果,必须找到有效的方法来满足对图书馆系统性综述支持日益增长的需求。本研究的目标有三个:1)确定安大略省医学院及其附属医院的健康科学图书馆提供的系统综述支持;2)确定这些机构的研究人员认为的教育需求;3)评估免费提供的、讨论系统综述过程各个阶段的在线教育模块对研究人员的潜在作用:我们在 2020 年 6 月和 7 月进行了一次横向调查。对数据进行了分析,对连续性指标采用中位数和四分位数间距 (IQR) 表示,对分类指标采用比例表示:受邀的 19 家图书馆中有 13 家提供了可用数据。大多数图书馆通过合作和参与支持系统综述的时间多于提供教育支持的时间。图书馆用户感知到的需求与图书馆/机构在为研究人员提供支持方面感知到的差距相反。所有图书馆都表示,他们会发现免费提供的在线教育模块对培训研究人员非常有用:我们跨专业研究团队的下一步工作是开发可免费获取的在线教育模块,向研究人员介绍系统综述流程的各个阶段。这些模块无法取代图书馆员、生物统计学家或方法论专家提供的直接支持,但它们可以为图书馆提供一种更有效的方式,让研究人员和受训人员熟悉最佳实践和普遍接受的报告指南,以进行高质量的综述。
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
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信