Medlibs and Systematic Reviews
Thursday, March 19, 2015
9:00 pm Eastern/6:00 pm Pacific
Led by Amy Blevins (@blevinsa) and Janna Lawrence (@jannabeth)
Health sciences librarians are increasingly more involved in systematic reviews, as those leading the reviews recognize librarians’ expertise in searching.
Here are some definitions if you aren't familiar with SRs and meta-analysis.
Systematic Review: a high-level overview of primary research on a particular research question that tries to identify, select, synthesize and appraise all high quality research evidence relevant to that question in order to answer it. – Definition from Cochrane Collaboration http://www.cochrane.org/about-us/evidence-based-health-care
Meta-Analysis: a quantitative statistical analysis of several separate but similar experiments or studies in order to test the pooled data for statistical significance [often found within systematic reviews, but not the same]. – Definition from www.merriam-webster.com (All meta-analyses should be part of a systematic review, but not all systematic reviews will include a meta-analysis.)
We’re looking forward to hearing what you have to say about systematic reviews and librarians’ roles. Here are a few questions to think about in preparation for Thursday’s chat.
- Are you currently working on SRs at your institution?
- If you aren't, do you want to?
- If you are, are you enjoying it?
- What types of training have you had?
- Do you have colleagues peer review your search strategies?
- How do you access resources if your institution does not have a subscription to a database needed for the review?
- Do you have a memorandum of understanding similar to this one? http://libguides.ecu.edu/ld.php?content_id=4600624
o Why or why not?
- How is record-keeping managed?