Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE A critical element in conducting a systematic review is the identification of studies. To date, very little empirical evidence has been reported on whether the presence of a librarian or information professional can contribute to the quality of the final product. The goal of this study was to compare the reporting rigor of the literature searching component of systematic reviews with and without the help of a librarian. METHOD Systematic reviews published from 2002 to 2011 in the twenty highest impact factor pediatrics journals were collected from MEDLINE. Corresponding authors were contacted via an email survey to determine if a librarian was involved, the role that the librarian played, and functions that the librarian performed. The reviews were scored independently by two reviewers using a fifteen-item checklist. RESULTS There were 186 reviews that met the inclusion criteria, and 44% of the authors indicated the involvement of a librarian in conducting the systematic review. With the presence of a librarian as coauthor or team member, the mean checklist score was 8.40, compared to 6.61 (p<0.001) for reviews without a librarian. CONCLUSIONS Findings indicate that having a librarian as a coauthor or team member correlates with a higher score in the literature searching component of systematic reviews.

[1]  Nila A Sathe,et al.  Searching for studies: a guide to information retrieval for Campbell systematic reviews , 2017 .

[2]  Melissa L Rethlefsen,et al.  Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. , 2015, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[3]  David Moher,et al.  Network meta-analyses could be improved by searching more sources and by involving a librarian. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[4]  L. Ge,et al.  Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals , 2014, Systematic Reviews.

[5]  L. A. Riesenberg,et al.  Conducting a successful systematic review of the literature, part 2 , 2014, Nursing.

[6]  Wei‐jie Gao,et al.  Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews or meta-analyses in nursing field in China. , 2014, International journal of nursing practice.

[7]  S. Elo,et al.  The methodological quality of systematic reviews published in high-impact nursing journals: a review of the literature. , 2014, Journal of clinical nursing.

[8]  Lisa Hartling,et al.  Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic review , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  Julie Glanville,et al.  Methodological developments in searching for studies for systematic reviews: past, present and future? , 2013, Systematic Reviews.

[10]  C. Faggion,et al.  Search strategies in systematic reviews in periodontology and implant dentistry. , 2013, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[11]  Guy Paré,et al.  Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Home Telemonitoring Interventions for Patients With Chronic Diseases: A Critical Assessment of Their Methodological Quality , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.

[12]  Patrick J. Kellam,et al.  Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature. , 2013, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  and Quality Quality of Reporting in Systematic Reviews of Implantable Medical Devices , 2013 .

[14]  Su Golder,et al.  Some improvements are apparent in identifying adverse effects in systematic reviews from 1994 to 2011. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  H. Seo,et al.  Quality assessment of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of nursing interventions conducted by Korean reviewers , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[16]  Robin A. Paynter,et al.  Peer Review of Search Strategies , 2012 .

[17]  L. Maggio,et al.  The role of medical librarians in medical education review articles. , 2012, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[18]  T. Trikalinos,et al.  Comprehensive Overview of Methods and Reporting of Meta-Analyses of Test Accuracy , 2012 .

[19]  M. Quigley,et al.  The assessment of the quality of reporting of meta-analyses in diagnostic research: a systematic review , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[20]  Jing-Yuan Fang,et al.  Methodological reporting of randomized controlled trials in major hepato-gastroenterology journals in 2008 and 1998: a comparative study , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[21]  Shandra L. Protzko,et al.  The Systematic Review Team: Contributions of the Health Sciences Librarian , 2011, Medical reference services quarterly.

[22]  M. Bhandari,et al.  Twenty years of meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery: has quality kept up with quantity? , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[24]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement , 2009, BMJ.

[26]  H. Vet,et al.  Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments , 2009, Quality of Life Research.

[27]  S. Golder,et al.  Poor reporting and inadequate searches were apparent in systematic reviews of adverse effects. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[28]  Junhua Zhang,et al.  Methodology and reporting quality of systematic review/meta-analysis of traditional Chinese medicine. , 2007, Journal of alternative and complementary medicine.

[29]  M. Egger,et al.  Bibliographic study showed improving methodology of meta-analyses published in leading journals 1993-2002. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[30]  David Moher,et al.  Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[31]  David Moher,et al.  Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[32]  T. Meta-Analysis : The Librarian as a Member of an Interdisciplinary Research Team , 2007 .

[33]  Annette Swinkels,et al.  Two physiotherapists, one librarian and a systematic literature review: collaboration in action. , 2006, Health information and libraries journal.

[34]  K. Ann McKibbon,et al.  Systematic Reviews and Librarians , 2006, Libr. Trends.

[35]  D. Moher,et al.  Systematic reviews involving complementary and alternative medicine interventions had higher quality of reporting than conventional medicine reviews. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[36]  J. McGowan,et al.  Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. , 2005, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[37]  M. R. Harris The librarian's roles in the systematic review process: a case study. , 2005, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[38]  John M Colford,et al.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: an illustrated, step-by-step guide. , 2004, The National medical journal of India.

[39]  A. Booth,et al.  The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study. , 2003, Health information and libraries journal.

[40]  P. Coulthard,et al.  The assessment of systematic reviews in dentistry. , 2003, European journal of oral sciences.

[41]  M. Dorgan,et al.  Evaluating the quality of systematic reviews in the emergency medicine literature. , 2001, Annals of emergency medicine.

[42]  I. Olkin,et al.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .

[43]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.

[44]  D T Richards,et al.  Librarian participation in meta-analysis projects. , 1995, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.