A Review of: Brzustowicz, R. (2023). From ChatGPT to CatGPT: The Implications of Artificial Intelligence on Library Cataloging. Information Technology and Libraries, 42(3). https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v42i3.16295 Objective – To evaluate the potential of ChatGPT as a tool for improving efficiency and accuracy in cataloguing library records. Design – Observational, descriptive study. Setting – Online, using ChatGPT and the WorldCat catalogue. Subject – The Large Language Model (LLM) ChatGPT. Methods – Prompting ChatGPT to create MARC records for items in different formats and languages and comparing the ChatGPT derived records versus those obtained from the WorldCat catalogue. Main results – ChatGPT was able to generate MARC records, but the accuracy of the records was questionable, despite the authors’ claims. Conclusion – Based on the results of this study, the author concludes that using ChatGPT to streamline the process of cataloging could allow library staff to focus time and energy on other types of work. However, the results presented suggest that ChatGPT introduces significant errors in the MARC records created, thereby requiring additional time for cataloguers to correct the error-laden records. The author correctly stresses that if ChatGPT were used to assist with cataloguing, it would remain important for professionals to check the records for completion and accuracy.
{"title":"ChatGPT not Useful as a Tool to Streamline Library Cataloguing Processes","authors":"Andrea Miller-Nesbitt","doi":"10.18438/eblip30524","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30524","url":null,"abstract":"A Review of:\u0000Brzustowicz, R. (2023). From ChatGPT to CatGPT: The Implications of Artificial Intelligence on Library Cataloging. Information Technology and Libraries, 42(3). https://doi.org/10.5860/ital.v42i3.16295\u0000Objective – To evaluate the potential of ChatGPT as a tool for improving efficiency and accuracy in cataloguing library records.\u0000Design – Observational, descriptive study.\u0000Setting – Online, using ChatGPT and the WorldCat catalogue.\u0000Subject – The Large Language Model (LLM) ChatGPT.\u0000Methods – Prompting ChatGPT to create MARC records for items in different formats and languages and comparing the ChatGPT derived records versus those obtained from the WorldCat catalogue.\u0000Main results – ChatGPT was able to generate MARC records, but the accuracy of the records was questionable, despite the authors’ claims.\u0000Conclusion – Based on the results of this study, the author concludes that using ChatGPT to streamline the process of cataloging could allow library staff to focus time and energy on other types of work. However, the results presented suggest that ChatGPT introduces significant errors in the MARC records created, thereby requiring additional time for cataloguers to correct the error-laden records. The author correctly stresses that if ChatGPT were used to assist with cataloguing, it would remain important for professionals to check the records for completion and accuracy.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141340635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A Review of: Rodriguez, S., & Mune, C. (2022). Uncoding library chatbots: Deploying a new virtual reference tool at the San Jose State University Library. Reference Services Review, 50(3), 392-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-05-2022-0020 Objective – To describe the development of an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot to support virtual reference services at an academic library. Design – Case study. Setting – A public university library in the United States. Subjects – 1,682 chatbot-user interactions. Methods – A university librarian and two graduate student interns researched and developed an AI chatbot to meet virtual reference needs. Developed using chatbot development software, Dialogflow, the chatbot was populated with questions, keywords, and other training phrases entered during user inquiries, text-based responses to inquiries, and intents (i.e., programmed mappings between user inquiries and chatbot responses). The chatbot utilized natural language processing and AI training for basic circulation and reference questions, and included interactive elements and embeddable widgets supported by Kommunicate (i.e., a bot support platform for chat widgets). The chatbot was enabled after live reference hours were over. User interactions with the chatbot were collected across 18 months since its launch. The authors used analytics from Kommunicate and Dialogflow to examine user interactions. Main Results – User interactions increased gradually since the launch of the chatbot. The chatbot logged approximately 44 monthly interactions during the spring 2021 term, which increased to approximately 137 monthly interactions during the spring 2022 term. The authors identified the most common reasons for users to engage the chatbot, using the chatbot’s triggered intents from user inquiries. These reasons included information about hours for the library building and live reference services, finding library resources (e.g., peer-reviewed articles, books), getting help from a librarian, locating databases and research guides, information about borrowing library items (e.g., laptops, books), and reporting issues with library resources. Conclusion – Libraries can successfully develop and train AI chatbots with minimal technical expertise and resources. The authors offered user experience considerations from their experience with the project, including editing library FAQs to be concise and easy to understand, testing and ensuring chatbot text and elements are accessible, and continuous maintenance of chatbot content. Kommunicate, Dialogflow, Google Analytics, and Crazy Egg (i.e., a web usage analytics tool) could not provide more in-depth user data (e.g., user clicks, scroll maps, heat maps), with plans to further explore other usage analysis software to collect the data. The authors noted that only 10% of users engaged the chatbot beyond the initial welcome prompt, requiring more research and user testing on how to facilitate user engagement.
{"title":"Academic Libraries Can Develop AI Chatbots for Virtual Reference Services with Minimal Technical Knowledge and Limited Resources","authors":"Matthew Chase","doi":"10.18438/eblip30523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30523","url":null,"abstract":"A Review of:\u0000Rodriguez, S., & Mune, C. (2022). Uncoding library chatbots: Deploying a new virtual reference tool at the San Jose State University Library. Reference Services Review, 50(3), 392-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-05-2022-0020\u0000Objective – To describe the development of an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot to support virtual reference services at an academic library.\u0000Design – Case study.\u0000Setting – A public university library in the United States.\u0000Subjects – 1,682 chatbot-user interactions.\u0000Methods – A university librarian and two graduate student interns researched and developed an AI chatbot to meet virtual reference needs. Developed using chatbot development software, Dialogflow, the chatbot was populated with questions, keywords, and other training phrases entered during user inquiries, text-based responses to inquiries, and intents (i.e., programmed mappings between user inquiries and chatbot responses). The chatbot utilized natural language processing and AI training for basic circulation and reference questions, and included interactive elements and embeddable widgets supported by Kommunicate (i.e., a bot support platform for chat widgets). The chatbot was enabled after live reference hours were over. User interactions with the chatbot were collected across 18 months since its launch. The authors used analytics from Kommunicate and Dialogflow to examine user interactions.\u0000Main Results – User interactions increased gradually since the launch of the chatbot. The chatbot logged approximately 44 monthly interactions during the spring 2021 term, which increased to approximately 137 monthly interactions during the spring 2022 term. The authors identified the most common reasons for users to engage the chatbot, using the chatbot’s triggered intents from user inquiries. These reasons included information about hours for the library building and live reference services, finding library resources (e.g., peer-reviewed articles, books), getting help from a librarian, locating databases and research guides, information about borrowing library items (e.g., laptops, books), and reporting issues with library resources.\u0000Conclusion – Libraries can successfully develop and train AI chatbots with minimal technical expertise and resources. The authors offered user experience considerations from their experience with the project, including editing library FAQs to be concise and easy to understand, testing and ensuring chatbot text and elements are accessible, and continuous maintenance of chatbot content. Kommunicate, Dialogflow, Google Analytics, and Crazy Egg (i.e., a web usage analytics tool) could not provide more in-depth user data (e.g., user clicks, scroll maps, heat maps), with plans to further explore other usage analysis software to collect the data. The authors noted that only 10% of users engaged the chatbot beyond the initial welcome prompt, requiring more research and user testing on how to facilitate user engagement.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141338184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective – This study was designed to explore the potential academic impact of open textbooks in writing courses. Methods – The researcher used statistical analyses of course outcomes for over 1,000 sections to examine the impact of OER usage on course GPA in three writing courses at an R1 university. Results – Study results reveal that using an OER textbook is associated with an overall increase in class GPA. Conclusion – When advocating for the use of OER in campus writing courses, librarians can point to findings that suggest improved student outcomes after a switch to OER in those courses.
{"title":"Beyond Cost Savings: The Impact of Open Textbooks on Writing Studies Course Grades","authors":"Sarah LeMire","doi":"10.18438/eblip30490","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30490","url":null,"abstract":"Objective – This study was designed to explore the potential academic impact of open textbooks in writing courses.\u0000Methods – The researcher used statistical analyses of course outcomes for over 1,000 sections to examine the impact of OER usage on course GPA in three writing courses at an R1 university.\u0000Results – Study results reveal that using an OER textbook is associated with an overall increase in class GPA.\u0000Conclusion – When advocating for the use of OER in campus writing courses, librarians can point to findings that suggest improved student outcomes after a switch to OER in those courses.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141344666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objectives – To understand how many undergraduate and graduate students use generative AI as part of their academic work, how often they use it, and for what tasks they use it. We also sought to identify how trustworthy students find generative AI and how they would feel about a locally maintained generative AI tool. Finally, we explored student interest in trainings related to using generative AI in academic work. This survey will help librarians better understand the rate at which generative AI is being adopted by university students and the need for librarians to incorporate generative AI into their work. Methods – A team of three library staff members and one student intern created, executed, and analyzed a survey of 360 undergraduate and graduate students at Harvard University. The survey was distributed via email lists and at cafes and libraries throughout campus. Data were collected and analyzed using Qualtrics. Results – We found that nearly 65% of respondents have used or plan to use generative AI chatbots for academic work, even though most respondents (65%) do not find their outputs trustworthy enough for academic work. The findings show that students actively use these tools but desire guidance around effectively using them. Conclusion – This research shows students are engaging with generative AI for academic work but do not fully trust the information that it produces. Librarians must be at the forefront of understanding the significant impact this technology will have on information-seeking behaviors and research habits. To effectively support students, librarians must know how to use these tools to advise students on how to critically evaluate AI output and effectively incorporate it into their research.
{"title":"A Survey on Student Use of Generative AI Chatbots for Academic Research","authors":"Amy Deschenes, Meg McMahon","doi":"10.18438/eblip30512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30512","url":null,"abstract":"Objectives – To understand how many undergraduate and graduate students use generative AI as part of their academic work, how often they use it, and for what tasks they use it. We also sought to identify how trustworthy students find generative AI and how they would feel about a locally maintained generative AI tool. Finally, we explored student interest in trainings related to using generative AI in academic work. This survey will help librarians better understand the rate at which generative AI is being adopted by university students and the need for librarians to incorporate generative AI into their work.\u0000Methods – A team of three library staff members and one student intern created, executed, and analyzed a survey of 360 undergraduate and graduate students at Harvard University. The survey was distributed via email lists and at cafes and libraries throughout campus. Data were collected and analyzed using Qualtrics.\u0000Results – We found that nearly 65% of respondents have used or plan to use generative AI chatbots for academic work, even though most respondents (65%) do not find their outputs trustworthy enough for academic work. The findings show that students actively use these tools but desire guidance around effectively using them.\u0000Conclusion – This research shows students are engaging with generative AI for academic work but do not fully trust the information that it produces. Librarians must be at the forefront of understanding the significant impact this technology will have on information-seeking behaviors and research habits. To effectively support students, librarians must know how to use these tools to advise students on how to critically evaluate AI output and effectively incorporate it into their research.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141344568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Increasing Student Engagement in a Re-opened Regional Campus Library: Results from a Student Focus Group","authors":"Isabel Vargas Ochoa","doi":"10.18438/eblip30513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30513","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141338566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective – The aim of this study is to examine the conceptualization and pedagogical approaches being used in Kenyan universities to teach and learn information literacy to determine if they are effective in addressing the information needs of the 21st century. The findings of this study will act as a guide to educational stakeholders in the design, review, and implementation of the information literacy curriculum. The findings will also create awareness among librarians of the diverse concepts in information literacy and hopefully inform their practice when delivering information literacy instruction. Additionally, future researchers can leverage the insights garnered from this study to advance their own works, thereby contributing to the ongoing growth of knowledge in this field. Methods – This study employed descriptive research design to collect qualitative data from the webpages of seven universities that were purposively selected: three being private universities and four were public universities. The seven academic libraries had an active online presence and adequate documentation of information literacy. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results – The research findings show a lack of consistency in the conceptualization of information literacy. In addition, the findings demonstrate a link between information literacy conceptualization and practice. Many of the online tutorials and information literacy documentations failed to address all the aspects of information literacy. Conclusion – In order to effectively address 21st century information needs, academic libraries should reevaluate their conceptualization of information literacy. This should be followed by a comprehensive evaluation of their information literacy instruction to ensure they cover all aspects of information literacy. It is essential for these libraries to provide information literacy instruction to students throughout their academic journey rather than just focusing on first-year students. Moreover, structured assessments of students should be implemented to gain feedback on the effectiveness of these instruction programs.
{"title":"Conceptualization and Practice of Information Literacy Pedagogy at Universities in Kenya","authors":"J. Masinde, Frankline Mugambi, D. Wambiri","doi":"10.18438/eblip30370","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30370","url":null,"abstract":"Objective – The aim of this study is to examine the conceptualization and pedagogical approaches being used in Kenyan universities to teach and learn information literacy to determine if they are effective in addressing the information needs of the 21st century. The findings of this study will act as a guide to educational stakeholders in the design, review, and implementation of the information literacy curriculum. The findings will also create awareness among librarians of the diverse concepts in information literacy and hopefully inform their practice when delivering information literacy instruction. Additionally, future researchers can leverage the insights garnered from this study to advance their own works, thereby contributing to the ongoing growth of knowledge in this field.\u0000Methods – This study employed descriptive research design to collect qualitative data from the webpages of seven universities that were purposively selected: three being private universities and four were public universities. The seven academic libraries had an active online presence and adequate documentation of information literacy. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis.\u0000Results – The research findings show a lack of consistency in the conceptualization of information literacy. In addition, the findings demonstrate a link between information literacy conceptualization and practice. Many of the online tutorials and information literacy documentations failed to address all the aspects of information literacy.\u0000Conclusion – In order to effectively address 21st century information needs, academic libraries should reevaluate their conceptualization of information literacy. This should be followed by a comprehensive evaluation of their information literacy instruction to ensure they cover all aspects of information literacy. It is essential for these libraries to provide information literacy instruction to students throughout their academic journey rather than just focusing on first-year students. Moreover, structured assessments of students should be implemented to gain feedback on the effectiveness of these instruction programs.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141340628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Margaret A Hoogland, Gerald Natal, Robert Wilmott, Clare F. Keating, Daisy Caruso
Objective – Beginning in Fiscal Year 2023, a university initiated a multi-year transition to an incentive-based budget model, under which the University Libraries budget would eventually be dependent upon yearly contributions from colleges. Such a change could result in the colleges having a more profound interest in library services and resources. In anticipation of any changes in thoughts and perceptions on existing University Libraries services, researchers crafted a survey for administrators, faculty, and staff focused on academic units related to the health sciences. The collected information would inform library budget decisions with the goal of optimizing support for research and educational interests. Methods – An acquisitions and collection management librarian, electronic resources librarian, two health science liaisons, and a staff member reviewed and considered distributing validated surveys to health science faculty, staff, and administrators. Ultimately, researchers concluded that a local survey would allow the University Libraries to address health science community needs and gauge use of library services. In late October 2022, the researchers obtained Institutional Review Board approval and distributed the online survey from mid-November to mid-December 2022. Results – This survey collected 112 responses from health science administrators, faculty, and staff. Many faculty and staff members had used University Libraries services for more than 16 years. By contrast, most administrators started using the library within the past six years. Cost-share agreements intrigued participants as mechanisms for maintaining existing subscriptions or paying for new databases and e-journals. Most participants supported improving immediate access to full-text articles instead of relying on interlibrary loans. Participants desired to build upon existing knowledge of Open Access publishing. Results revealed inefficiencies in how the library communicates changes in collections (e.g., journals, books) and services. Conclusion – A report of the study findings sent to library administration fulfilled the research aim to inform budget decision making. With the possibility of reduced funds under the new internal budgeting model to both academic programs and the library, the study supports consideration of internal cost-sharing agreements. Findings exposed the lack of awareness of the library’s efforts at decision making transparency, which requires exploration of alternative communication methods. Research findings also revealed awareness of Open Educational Resources and Open Access publishing as areas that deserve heightened promotional efforts from librarians. Finally, this local survey and methodology provides a template for potential use at other institutions.
{"title":"Gauging Academic Unit Perceptions of Library Services During a Transition in University Budget Models","authors":"Margaret A Hoogland, Gerald Natal, Robert Wilmott, Clare F. Keating, Daisy Caruso","doi":"10.18438/eblip30379","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30379","url":null,"abstract":"Objective – Beginning in Fiscal Year 2023, a university initiated a multi-year transition to an incentive-based budget model, under which the University Libraries budget would eventually be dependent upon yearly contributions from colleges. Such a change could result in the colleges having a more profound interest in library services and resources. In anticipation of any changes in thoughts and perceptions on existing University Libraries services, researchers crafted a survey for administrators, faculty, and staff focused on academic units related to the health sciences. The collected information would inform library budget decisions with the goal of optimizing support for research and educational interests.\u0000Methods – An acquisitions and collection management librarian, electronic resources librarian, two health science liaisons, and a staff member reviewed and considered distributing validated surveys to health science faculty, staff, and administrators. Ultimately, researchers concluded that a local survey would allow the University Libraries to address health science community needs and gauge use of library services. In late October 2022, the researchers obtained Institutional Review Board approval and distributed the online survey from mid-November to mid-December 2022.\u0000Results – This survey collected 112 responses from health science administrators, faculty, and staff. Many faculty and staff members had used University Libraries services for more than 16 years. By contrast, most administrators started using the library within the past six years. Cost-share agreements intrigued participants as mechanisms for maintaining existing subscriptions or paying for new databases and e-journals. Most participants supported improving immediate access to full-text articles instead of relying on interlibrary loans. Participants desired to build upon existing knowledge of Open Access publishing. Results revealed inefficiencies in how the library communicates changes in collections (e.g., journals, books) and services.\u0000Conclusion – A report of the study findings sent to library administration fulfilled the research aim to inform budget decision making. With the possibility of reduced funds under the new internal budgeting model to both academic programs and the library, the study supports consideration of internal cost-sharing agreements. Findings exposed the lack of awareness of the library’s efforts at decision making transparency, which requires exploration of alternative communication methods. Research findings also revealed awareness of Open Educational Resources and Open Access publishing as areas that deserve heightened promotional efforts from librarians. Finally, this local survey and methodology provides a template for potential use at other institutions.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141338684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Evidence Summary Theme: Artificial Intelligence","authors":"Heather MacDonald","doi":"10.18438/eblip30574","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30574","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141343823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
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.
{"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":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30405","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.\u0000Methods – 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.\u0000Results – 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). \u0000Conclusion – 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":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141344931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Evidence Based Principles to Accelerate Health Information Flow and Uptake Among Older Adults","authors":"Nick Ubels, Lauren Albrecht","doi":"10.18438/eblip30529","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30529","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141343986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：