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

Ref ID 937
First Author D. Ramirez
Journal THE JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANSHIP
Year Of Publishing 2022
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133322000830
Keywords • Searching
• Team
• Expertise
• Campbell
Problem(s) • Literature searches not validated by information specialist
• Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country United States
Checklists • MECIR
• PRESS
Aim To assess differences in methodological conduct (MECCIR) and search standards (PRESS) between protocols and reviews due to librarian involvement from Campbell systematic reviews with protocols published between October 2014 to January 2019.
Level of Investigation Analytical
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
Number of systematic reviews included 19
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 19
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description