Location
Paper Session #2b: Library Spaces, Services and Collections
Start Date
12-10-2019 2:35 PM
End Date
12-10-2019 2:45 PM
Type of Work
Presentation
Description
Objective: The purpose of this study is to document the successes and failures of solely developing and supporting a systematic review consultation service. While these insights are specific to the systematic review service creation process, the tips can be applied to any service idea met with high demand and little resources.
Methods: The systematic review service described in this study was developed at a non-health sciences specific university library at a Carnegie-R1 research institution. The service has a multi-tiered approach created using best practices identified from systematic review services offered at other institutions, and the strengths and weaknesses of the service are documented by the experiences of the service’s sole administrator.
Results: The success of the service demonstrates the feasibility of developing and offering a systematic review consultation service with limited staff and resources.The high usage of the systematic review service indicates that the level of the service offered, even as a partial responsibility of one librarian, is meeting the present-day need for systematic review services at this library. The weakness of the service, as well as its strengths, showcases anticipated areas for growth. In addition to meeting researcher needs, the service contributes to benefits to the library as a whole, including forging closer relationships with university research teams, establishing the library as an expert research hub, and demonstrating the value of a health sciences librarian in a non-health sciences library.
Conclusion: The success of this systematic review service demonstrates the feasibility of offering a systematic-review service at a high-demand library with limited personnel and resources.
Going It Alone: Successes and Failures Developing a Single-Staff Systematic Review Service
Paper Session #2b: Library Spaces, Services and Collections
Objective: The purpose of this study is to document the successes and failures of solely developing and supporting a systematic review consultation service. While these insights are specific to the systematic review service creation process, the tips can be applied to any service idea met with high demand and little resources.
Methods: The systematic review service described in this study was developed at a non-health sciences specific university library at a Carnegie-R1 research institution. The service has a multi-tiered approach created using best practices identified from systematic review services offered at other institutions, and the strengths and weaknesses of the service are documented by the experiences of the service’s sole administrator.
Results: The success of the service demonstrates the feasibility of developing and offering a systematic review consultation service with limited staff and resources.The high usage of the systematic review service indicates that the level of the service offered, even as a partial responsibility of one librarian, is meeting the present-day need for systematic review services at this library. The weakness of the service, as well as its strengths, showcases anticipated areas for growth. In addition to meeting researcher needs, the service contributes to benefits to the library as a whole, including forging closer relationships with university research teams, establishing the library as an expert research hub, and demonstrating the value of a health sciences librarian in a non-health sciences library.
Conclusion: The success of this systematic review service demonstrates the feasibility of offering a systematic-review service at a high-demand library with limited personnel and resources.