Evidence Synthesis Instructional Offerings in Library and Information Science Programs
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30554Abstract
Objective – The goal of this study was to determine the extent to which evidence synthesis (ES) is incorporated into American Library Association (ALA)-accredited master’s level Library and Information Studies (LIS) programs. The study considered the depth of coverage, interest in additional curriculum content, and preferences for expanding existing coverage.
Methods – A cross-sectional survey was implemented. Program administrators and instructors currently involved with ALA-accredited master’s level LIS programs in Canada and the United States were eligible to participate. Recruitment emails targeted faculty and administrators from a directory of institutions offering ALA-accredited MLIS programs.
Results – 26 eligible responses from 20 unique institutions were obtained. Most respondents reported that ES is incorporated into the curriculum, albeit only briefly in most cases. Most of the respondents expressed interest in incorporating more ES content into the curriculum, specifically as a portion of a course. A greater number of respondents would prefer to bring in external guest speakers to teach the ES content, but a small percentage were interested in training for existing LIS instructors.
Conclusion – In-depth instruction on ES in LIS programs is currently limited. However, there appears to be interest in increasing ES content in curricula, primarily in the form of guest lecturers.
Downloads
References
Aamodt, M., Huurdeman, H., & Strømme, H. (2019). Librarian Co-Authored Systematic Reviews are Associated with Lower Risk of Bias Compared to Systematic Reviews with Acknowledgement of Librarians or No Participation by Librarians. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 14(4), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29601 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29601
American Library Association. (n.d.). Directory of ALA-accredited and candidate programs in library and information studies. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/educationcareers/accreditedprograms/directory
American Library Association. (2023). ALA’s core competencies of librarianship. https://www.ala.org/educationcareers/sites/ala.org.educationcareers/files/content/2022%20ALA%20Core%20Competences%20of%20Librarianship_FINAL.pdf
Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., Porritt, K., Pilla, B., & Jordan, Z. (Eds.). (2024). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI. https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL DOI: https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-24-01
Bertot, J., Sarin, L., & Jaeger, P. (2015). Re-envisioning the MLS: The future of librarian education. Public Libraries, 54(6), 23-33.
Beverley, C. A., Booth, A., & Bath, P. A. (2003). The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: A health information case study. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 20(2), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-1842.2003.00411.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-1842.2003.00411.x
Blanco, M. A., Capello, C. F., Dorsch, J. L., Perry, G., & Zanetti, M. L. (2014). A survey study of evidence-based medicine training in US and Canadian medical schools. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 102(3), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.005
Boice, J. (2019). An exploration of systematic review publication trends in conservation biology journals. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 91. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2
Borrego, M., Foster, M. J., & Froyd, J. E. (2015). What is the state of the art of systematic reviewing in engineering education? Journal of Engineering Education, 104(2), 212–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20069
Bright, K. M., & Colón-Aguirre, M. (2022). Prepare to be unprepared? LIS curriculum and academic liaison preparation. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 48(6), 102602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102602 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102602
Canadian Association of Research Libraries Competencies Working Group. (2020). Competencies for librarians in Canadian research libraries. https://www.carl-abrc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Competencies-Final-EN-1-2.pdf
Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H. (2002). A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 25(1), 12–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278702025001003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278702025001003
Champion, C. (2018). Response to “Environmental scan and evaluation of best practices for online systematic review resources.” Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(4). https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.496 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.496
Chapman, K. (2021). Characteristics of systematic reviews in the social sciences. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(5), 102396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102396 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102396
Chung, E., Schalk, J., & Yoon, J. (2022). How have LIS school curricula evolved over the past twenty years? Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 45(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjilsrcsib.v45i1.14192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5206/cjilsrcsib.v45i1.14192
Davis, R., & Saunders, L. (2020). Essential skills for corporate and special librarians. Journal of Library Administration, 60(7), 762–783. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2020.1786984 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2020.1786984
Desmeules, R., Dorgan, M., & Campbell, S. (2016). Acknowledging librarians’ contributions to systematic review searching. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 37(2), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.5596/c16-014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5596/c16-014
Dodson, M. (2020). On target or missing the mark? Instruction courses in LIS graduate programs. Public Services Quarterly, 16(2), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2020.1745131 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2020.1745131
Institute of Medicine. (2011). Finding what works in health care: Standards for systematic reviews. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/13059
Eldermire, E., & Young, S. (2022). World of reviews. In M. J. Foster & S. T. Jewell (Eds.), Piecing Together Systematic Reviews and Other Evidence Syntheses (pp. 17–30). Rowman & Littlefield.
Evidence Synthesis Institute. (n.d.). Systematic reviews and evidence synthesis beyond the health sciences [Online course]. Retrieved April 26, 2024, from https://pressbooks.umn.edu/evidencesynthesisinstitute/
Eysenbach, G. (2004). Improving the quality of web surveys: The checklist for reporting results of Internet e-surveys (CHERRIES). Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(3), e34. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34
Fehrmann, P., & Thomas, J. (2011). Comprehensive computer searches and reporting in systematic reviews. Research Synthesis Methods, 2(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.31 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.31
Ghezzi‐Kopel, K., Ault, J., Chimwaza, G., Diekmann, F., Eldermire, E., Gathoni, N., Kelly, J., Kinengyere, A. A., Kocher, M., & Lwoga, E. T. (2021). Making the case for librarian expertise to support evidence synthesis for the sustainable development goals. Research Synthesis Methods, 13(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1528 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1528
Higgins, J., Lasserson, T., Thomas, J., Flemyng, E., & Churchill, R. (2023). Methodological expectations of Cochrane intervention reviews (MECIR). Cochrane. https://community.cochrane.org/mecir-manual
Hong, Q. N., & Pluye, P. (2018). Systematic reviews: A brief historical overview. Education for Information, 34(4), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180219 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180219
Kallaher, A., Eldermire, E. R. B., Fournier, C. T., Ghezzi-Kopel, K., Johnson, K. A., Morris-Knower, J., Scinto-Madonich, S., & Young, S. (2020). Library systematic review service supports evidence-based practice outside of medicine. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(6), 102222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102222
Koffel, J. B. (2015). Use of recommended search strategies in systematic reviews and the impact of librarian involvement: A cross-sectional survey of recent authors. PLOS One, 10(5), e0125931. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125931 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125931
Kogut, A., Foster, M., Ramirez, D., & Xiao, D. (2019). Critical appraisal of mathematics education systematic review search methods: Implications for social sciences librarians. College & Research Libraries, 80(7), 973. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.7.973 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.7.973
Kogut, A., Ramirez, D., & Foster, M. J. (2022). Systematic review training model for education librarians: A case study. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 28(2), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2020.1784761 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2020.1784761
Koizumi, M., & Widdersheim, M. M. (2019). Specialties and strategies in academic libraries: A cluster analysis approach. Library Management, 40(1–2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-10-2017-0114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-10-2017-0114
Kousha, K., & Abdoli, M. (2008). Subject analysis of online syllabi in library and information science: Do academic LIS programs match with job requirements? IFLA Conference Proceedings, 1–13.
Lê, M., Winkler, J., & Neilson, C. (2024). Benchmarking Librarian Support of Systematic Reviews in the Sciences, Humanities, and Social Sciences. College & Research Libraries, 85(4). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.4.606 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.4.606
Lê, M., Winkler, J., & Neilson, C. (2023). Training needs and preferences for librarians supporting systematic reviews in the sciences, humanities, and social sciences. OSF. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/e573s DOI: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/e573s
Lund, B., Wang, T., Widdersheim, M., & Fay, B. (2023). Interrogating shortcomings in instructional librarianship preparation: A comparison of perspectives of employers, LIS educators, and instructional librarians. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 64(2), 120–141. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2020-0038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2020-0038
Marsalis, S. (2020, January 18). Adoption of systematic and related review methods in social work and reporting quality of underpinning searches. Society for Social Work and Research Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.
McGowan, J., & Sampson, M. (2005). Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(1), 74–80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15685278
Meert, D., Torabi, N., & Costella, J. (2016). Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 104(4), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.004
Methods Group of the Campbell Collaboration. (2019). Methodological expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention reviews: Conduct standards. Campbell Collaboration. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/pb-assets/Campbell%20MECCIR%20Conduct%20standards%20Nov2019-1573120397657.docx
Pandolfelli, G., Koos, J. A., & Benz Scott, L. (2022). An analysis of ALA‐accredited MLS curricula indicates deficiencies in the initial training provided for public librarians. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 39(3), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12443 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12443
Parker, R. M. N., Boulos, L., Visintini, S., Ritchie, K., & Hayden, J. (2018). Environmental scan and evaluation of best practices for online systematic review resources. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(2). https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.241 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.241
Patsopoulos, N. A. (2005). Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA, 293(19), 2362. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.19.2362 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.19.2362
Pawliuk, C., Cheng, S., Zheng, A., & Siden, H. (Hal). (2024). Librarian involvement in systematic reviews was associated with higher quality of reported search methods: A cross-sectional survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 166, 111237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.111237 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.111237
Premji, Z., Hayden, K. A., & Rutherford, S. (2021). Teaching knowledge synthesis methodologies in a higher education setting: A scoping review of face-to-face instructional programs. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 16(2), 111–144. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29895
Premji, Z., Splenda, R., & Young, S. (2022). An exploration of business librarian participation in knowledge synthesis reviews. College & Research Libraries, 83(2), 314–336. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.2.314 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.2.314
Reed, J. B., & Carroll, A. J. (2020). Roles for health sciences librarians at college and university libraries. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, (94). https://doi.org/10.29173/istl42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/istl42
Rethlefsen, M. L., Farrell, A. M., Osterhaus Trzasko, L. C., & Brigham, T. J. (2015). Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68(6), 617–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.025
Rod, A. B. (2023). It takes a researcher to know a researcher: Academic librarian perspectives regarding skills and training for research data support in Canada. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 18(2), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30297 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30297
Royle, P., Kandala, N.-B., Barnard, K., & Waugh, N. (2013). Bibliometrics of systematic reviews: Analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors. Systematic Reviews, 2(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-74 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-74
Saunders, L. (2019). Core and more: Examining foundational and specialized content in library and information science. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 60(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis.60.1.2018-0034 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis.60.1.2018-0034
Smith, N. M., & Warner, H. L. (1990). Educating future librarians: The library school perspective. Journal of Library Administration, 11(3–4), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v11n03_04 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v11n03_04
Spencer, A. J., & Eldredge, J. D. (2018). Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: A scoping review. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(1), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.82 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.82
Stanton, J. M., Kim, Y., Oakleaf, M., Lankes, R. D., Gandel, P., Cogburn, D., & Liddy, E. D. (2011). Education for eScience professionals: Job analysis, curriculum guidance, and program considerations. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 52(2), 79–94. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41308884
Thomas, C., & Urban, R. (2018). What do data librarians think of the MLIS? Professionals’ perceptions of knowledge transfer, trends, and challenges. College & Research Libraries, 79(3), 401–423. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.3.401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.3.401
Townsend, W. A., Anderson, P. F., Ginier, E. C., MacEachern, M. P., Saylor, K. M., Shipman, B. L., & Smith, J. E. (2017). A competency framework for librarians involved in systematic reviews. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 105(3), 268–275. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.189
Valenti, S., & Lund, B. (2021). Preparing the instructional librarian: Representation of ACRL roles and strengths in MLS course descriptions. College & Research Libraries, 82(4), 530. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.82.4.530 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.82.4.530
Valentine, J. C., Littell, J. H., & Young, S. (Eds.). Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: A Campbell Collaboration online course. Open Learning Initiative, (2022). https://oli.cmu.edu/courses/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analysis/
Williams, R. D., & Saunders, L. (2020). What the field needs: Core knowledge, skills, and abilities for public librarianship. The Library Quarterly, 90(3), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1086/708958 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/708958
Xu, J., Kang, Q., & Song, Z. (2015). The current state of systematic reviews in library and information studies. Library & Information Science Research, 37(4), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2015.11.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2015.11.003
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Meghan Lafferty, Zahra Premji, Philip Herold, Megan Kocher, Scott Marsalis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International applies to all works published by Evidence Based Library and Information Practice. Authors will retain copyright of the work.
