Building a Critical Mass of Systematic Review Authors and Teachers: A Collaboration between Librarians and Faculty
- What is the rate of systematic reviews for comparable institutions (those without med schools)?
- Need to meet with Deans, Directors, Faculty to determine needs
- Work with researchers on currently publishing SRs & MAs
- Interest in non-HS programs like Educational Technology, Psychology/Counseling, Statistics, & College of Liberal Arts (ex: Health Care Ethics)
- Grant from NNLM for on-campus event for training on SRs
- Created LibGuide and online community for on-going support (basic focus but decent guide usage even before official launch)
- Speakers were a combination of experts and local researchers
- Workshop topics
- Importance of SRs, process
- Breakout sessions on meta-analysis, integrating EBP into teaching
- Panel discussion on opportunities and barriers
- Librarian training
- 3 options: UofMichigan workshop, Pitt program, applied project for university conference
- Workshop attendance filled in days (n=27)
- SRs in Education
- class presentation, UG research symposium, critically appraised topics, IPE Health Research Skills course
Assessing Value of Library Services on Research, Clinical Practice, Education, and Administration
- Had done Library Values survey 5 years prior
- Benefits of informationists services (overall results, but different audiences have different rates per category)
- information search (56%)
- point of use instruction (19%)
- citation management (9%)
- publication/grant prep (4%)
- students rank coursework as the highest indicator for intended use of library resources
- What resources people used with and without informationists
- with Informationists, more likely to use more resources, and resources like CINAHL, Embase, etc
- without, more likely to use Google or Dynamed
MEDLIB 2011-2016
- 5 year analysis of content and comparison with 1997 article analysis
- as of 2016, MEDLIB-L has ~2000 subscribers (35% education domains, 23% healthcare orgs/hospitals)
One systematic review software to rule them all — NOT!
- EndNote web works terribly for researchers across different institutions
- Mendeley sinks beautifully across users but does not have as much space for PDF space (without payment)
- RefWorks crashed with large RIS file due to timeout
- SRAssistant deduplication – unsure how well it works
- **checkout expert searching listserv
- RefMan only available to Cochrane reviewers
- SRDR wonderful but clunky due to framing
- Covidence – can’t have more than 1 person assigned to an article; after 2nd reviewer, then the article moves out of the pool of review