The case of the disappearing librarians: analyzing documentation of librarians' contributions to systematic reviews

Ref ID 849
First Author A. Brunskill
Journal JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION
Year Of Publishing 2022
URL https://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/1505
Keywords Protocols
Author
Expertise
Team
Searching
Non-Cochrane reviews
Problem(s) Literature searches not validated by information specialist
Number of systematic reviews included 206
Summary of Findings From 209 systematic reviews and meta-analyses whose registered protocols mentioned librarian involvement registered in PROSPERO between 2017 and 2018. Of the 209 included reviews 28% had a librarian co-author, 41% named a librarian in the acknowledgements section, and 78% mentioned the contribution of a librarian within the body of the review. However, mentions of a librarian within the included review were often generic (“a librarian”) and in 31% of all reviews analysed no librarian was specified by name. In 9% of the reviews, there was no reference to a librarian found at all.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? No