Adherence to systematic review standards: Impact of librarian involvement in Campbell Collaboration's education reviews

Ref ID 937
First Author D. Ramirez
Year Of Publishing 2022
Keywords Campbell
Problem(s) Literature searches not validated by information specialist
Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
Number of systematic reviews included 19
Summary of Findings From 19 included Campbell systematic reviews with protocols published between October 2014 to January 2019. Over half of the reviews (n=12, 63 %) acknowledged a librarian in regard to searching for studies. Librarians or information specialists were listed as an author on five (26 %) reviews and were consulted for assistance with the search strategy or retrieving articles on seven (37 %) reviews. There was a statistically significant difference on the average of those protocols and reviews that met the MECCIR criteria without a librarian presence and those with a librarian presence. The authors highlight that being published in Campbell Systematic Reviews does not necessarily mean full compliance with Campbell's standards
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