Stephanie Roth, Biomedical and Research Services Librarian at the Health Sciences Libraries,
doesn’t always think of herself as doing “assessment.” But my conversation with her about the evolving service and education she’s doing with Systematic Reviews is a good example of how librarians at Temple are being strategic and continuously improving how we support faculty and students, even when we don’t think about it in those terms.
What is a Systematic Review, exactly?
It’s like a literature review on steroids. It’s the most comprehensive type of literature review using a very specific protocol. The work must be transparent and reproducible. Anyone who claims to do a systematic review needs background and knowledge of the seven stages to be followed. Take a single question and try to figure out what the evidence is; then critically analyse the evidence and form a consensus at the end on the current state of evidence. The author creates own analysis based on what is published; It’s important that the process does not introduce any personal bias.
It sounds like a really good opportunity for librarians to support faculty research? So how did you get involved in this work?
I’ve been here for almost three years. I had some gaps when I came. I’d been out of health care for a couple of years, and although I had conducted systematic reviews (from nuts to bolts), at the co-author level, the technology had changed by the time I got to Temple. For instance, there are many more options for citation managers, and Temple also has lots of journals and databases. I had had no formal training in Systematic Reviews, and there is so much to know. So I had a huge learning curve.
In your time here, what have you learned about the specific needs of Temple faculty and students?
Graduate students are often assigned systematic reviews but not given information about them. They may understand this to be an ordinary literature review. We spend a lot of time with researchers (faculty, students, hospital staff) so we understand the kind of review that they actually need for their work.
The word about how we can help is getting out, informally through word of mouth but also guest lectures and workshops. I see these consultations as educational – I used to be a school teacher. We are trying to move from “this is a service we can do for you” to “this is what you need to ask yourself to know what approach to take.”
I’ve done a lot of work with the other HSL librarians as well. For instance, on how to know when a question is more than it first appears. A patron might arrive at the desk asking for help finding articles, but upon some probing, we learn that it’s not for a single course assignment, but is more like a systematic review. The librarian can help them to select the appropriate review type.
As these services become better known, how do you manage the additional work?
A couple of things. We have a new protocol form that faculty need to fill out before we begin working with them. In the past, faculty were requesting a full systematic search but they hadn’t done much in the way of preparation. Our request form requires them to think carefully about their question, their inclusion and exclusion criteria. Completing this work streamlines the process, and also demonstrates a level of investment on their part. Having the search “protocol” developed before the process begins is important to eliminating bias. I also ask up front for co-authorship.
We’ve also implemented team training. This was something that Barbara Kuchan (Director, Health Science Libraries) suggested, and it’s making a lot of sense. I’ve created a formal model for this process that can be replicated by other librarians. I also use the Open Science Framework to share the model more widely.
In addition to creating a more sustainable process for supporting Systematic Reviews at Temple, I wanted to model what “open access” might look like. I used to be worried that I would attract critique, or my work would be stolen, but now I think about it as a benefit to other librarians. And I think that overall, it will improve the quality of systematic reviews published by Temple authors.
So you are taking more of a collaborative role with faculty and students for this type of research, you are developing and training a team to support the work, AND you are using an open access platform to share your work.
It’s a great example of how we are expanding our roles as librarians. Thanks for sharing your experience.