Systematic Review Research Guides and Support Services in Academic Libraries in the US: A Content Analysis of Resources and Services in 2023

IF 0.4 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Evidence Based Library and Information Practice Pub Date : 2024-06-14 DOI:10.18438/eblip30405
Elizabeth Sterner
{"title":"Systematic Review Research Guides and Support Services in Academic Libraries in the US: A Content Analysis of Resources and Services in 2023","authors":"Elizabeth Sterner","doi":"10.18438/eblip30405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective – The purpose of this research project was to examine the state of library research guides supporting systematic reviews in the United States as well as services offered by the libraries of these academic institutions. This paper highlights the informational background, internal and external educational resources, informational and educational tools, and support services offered throughout the stages of a systematic review.\nMethods – The methodology centered on a content analysis review of systematic review library research guides currently available in 2023. An incognito search in Google as well as hand searching were used to identify the relevant research guides. Keywords searched included: academic library systematic review research guide.\nResults – The analysis of 87 systematic review library research guides published in the United States showed that they vary in terms of resources and tools shared, depth of each stage, and support services provided. Results showed higher levels of information and informational tools shared compared to internal and external education and educational tools. Findings included high coverage of the introductory, planning, guidelines and reporting standards, conducting searches, and reference management stages. Support services offered fell into three potential categories: consultation and training; acknowledgement; and collaboration and co-authorship. The most referenced systematic review software tools and resources varied from subscription-based tools (e.g., Covidence and DistillerSR) to open access tools (e.g., Rayyan and abstrackr). \nConclusion – A systematic review library research guide is not the type of research guide that you can create and forget about. Librarians should consider the resources, whether educational or informational, and the depth of coverage when developing or updating systematic review research guides or support services. Maintaining a systematic review research guide and support service requires continual training and maintaining familiarity with all resources and tools linked in the research guide.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30405","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective – The purpose of this research project was to examine the state of library research guides supporting systematic reviews in the United States as well as services offered by the libraries of these academic institutions. This paper highlights the informational background, internal and external educational resources, informational and educational tools, and support services offered throughout the stages of a systematic review. Methods – The methodology centered on a content analysis review of systematic review library research guides currently available in 2023. An incognito search in Google as well as hand searching were used to identify the relevant research guides. Keywords searched included: academic library systematic review research guide. Results – The analysis of 87 systematic review library research guides published in the United States showed that they vary in terms of resources and tools shared, depth of each stage, and support services provided. Results showed higher levels of information and informational tools shared compared to internal and external education and educational tools. Findings included high coverage of the introductory, planning, guidelines and reporting standards, conducting searches, and reference management stages. Support services offered fell into three potential categories: consultation and training; acknowledgement; and collaboration and co-authorship. The most referenced systematic review software tools and resources varied from subscription-based tools (e.g., Covidence and DistillerSR) to open access tools (e.g., Rayyan and abstrackr).  Conclusion – A systematic review library research guide is not the type of research guide that you can create and forget about. Librarians should consider the resources, whether educational or informational, and the depth of coverage when developing or updating systematic review research guides or support services. Maintaining a systematic review research guide and support service requires continual training and maintaining familiarity with all resources and tools linked in the research guide.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
系统回顾美国学术图书馆的研究指南和支持服务:2023 年资源与服务内容分析
目的--本研究项目旨在考察美国支持系统综述的图书馆研究指南的现状,以及这些学术机构的图书馆所提供的服务。本文重点介绍了系统综述各阶段的信息背景、内部和外部教育资源、信息和教育工具以及提供的支持服务。方法--研究方法主要是对 2023 年现有的系统综述图书馆研究指南进行内容分析。通过谷歌隐身搜索和人工搜索来确定相关的研究指南。搜索的关键词包括:学术图书馆系统综述研究指南。结果--对美国出版的 87 份系统综述图书馆研究指南的分析表明,这些指南在共享资源和工具、每个阶段的深度以及提供的支持服务方面各不相同。结果显示,与内部和外部教育及教育工具相比,共享信息和信息工具的水平更高。结果显示,介绍、规划、指南和报告标准、进行搜索和参考资料管理等阶段的覆盖率较高。所提供的支持服务可分为三类:咨询和培训、认可以及合作和合著。被引用最多的系统综述软件工具和资源既有基于订阅的工具(如 Covidence 和 DistillerSR),也有开放获取的工具(如 Rayyan 和 abstrackr)。结论--系统综述图书馆研究指南不是那种创建后就可以忘掉的研究指南。图书馆员在开发或更新系统综述研究指南或支持服务时,应考虑资源(无论是教育资源还是信息资源)和覆盖深度。维护系统综述研究指南和支持服务需要持续的培训,并保持对研究指南中链接的所有资源和工具的熟悉。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Students’ Perspective of the Advantages and Disadvantages of ChatGPT Compared to Reference Librarians Academic Libraries Can Develop AI Chatbots for Virtual Reference Services with Minimal Technical Knowledge and Limited Resources A Study on the Knowledge and Perception of Artificial Intelligence Increasing Student Engagement in a Re-opened Regional Campus Library: Results from a Student Focus Group Gauging Academic Unit Perceptions of Library Services During a Transition in University Budget Models
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1