By Alice Cann, Academic Liaison Librarian for Business at Brunel University London
This is the fourth and final post in a blog series of blog reporting on an Evidence Synthesis Institute (ESI) delivered by the University of Minnesota, Cornell University, and Carnegie Mellon University. These posts expand on a post originally on Alice’s Researcher Librarian blog.
The Evidence Synthesis Institute provided comprehensive initial training for librarians outside of health sciences who work with evidence synthesis. Following the institute, I have become more confident in presenting myself as someone who has expertise in this area, while also making it clear how much more I have to learn.
One librarian’s activities following the Evidence Synthesis Institute
Since the institute I attended, which was in August 2023, I have:
- Met with increasing numbers of researchers working on systematic reviews, or research that incorporates systematic elements, responding to their questions and suggesting areas to explore that would improve the quality of their research, such as options for critical appraisal.
- Promoted to academic staff in the department I work with that I am available to work on funded research projects in an information specialist role.
- Highlighted the fact that I now have the grounding to be able to provide training not only on systematic searching, but also covering an overview of the steps required throughout an evidence synthesis project.
- Started planning the creation of a series of recorded training videos on elements of evidence synthesis, for master’s students to refer to when doing a systematic literature review. Material referred to during the Institute have been beneficial when arranging this.
- Reviewed my previous plans for applying for research funding in order to develop capacity to work, with others, on a systematic review myself (a work in progress!)
Wider actions and activities for Institute participants
While the above activities are possible due to my developed understanding, one week of training is only the start, and there is always so much more to learn. The librarians running the institute, many of them at least, have years of experience working on and peer reviewing systematic reviews, and inputting into official guidance and training on evidence synthesis. To continue my learning, I have other plans that I think will align with the plans of many Institute participants.
- Read through notes and recommended sources and watch some of the optional homework videos that I didn’t manage at the time. High up on my list is an article on setting up a systematic review service outside of the health sciences (Riegelman and Kocher, 2018).
- Set up meetings with a few people at my institution to get their perspective on avenues I think would be valuable to explore, based on my experience from the Institute.
- Plan what I would include in training sessions I could run on systematic reviews for academics and doctoral researchers – I’ve already had a couple of requests for this.
- Report on the content and learning from the Institute with the intention of improving understanding of evidence synthesis, and the potential for librarian involvement, more widely. I want to encourage more librarians to understand the value their skills and experience could add to systematic and scoping reviews, and to encourage other researchers to consider starting a conversation with their librarians about working on research projects together.
This includes reporting to other organisations I’m involved in, such as the Business Librarians Association, and CILIP (the UK Library and Information Association), and is one of my intentions in writing these Campbell Collaboration blog posts!
References
Riegelman, A. and Kocher, M. (2018) ‘For your enrichment: A model for developing and implementing a Systematic Review service for disciplines outside of the Health Sciences’, Reference and User Services Quarterly, 58(1), pp. 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/rusq.58.1.6837