• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

图书馆员在系统评价中的作用:一项范围综述

Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review.

作者信息

Spencer Angela J, Eldredge Jonathan D

出版信息

J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Jan;106(1):46-56. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2018.82. Epub 2018 Jan 2.

DOI:10.5195/jmla.2018.82
PMID:29339933
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5764593/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

What roles do librarians and information professionals play in conducting systematic reviews? Librarians are increasingly called upon to be involved in systematic reviews, but no study has considered all the roles librarians can perform. This inventory of existing and emerging roles aids in defining librarians' systematic reviews services.

METHODS

For this scoping review, the authors conducted controlled vocabulary and text-word searches in the PubMed; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; and CINAHL databases. We separately searched for articles published in the the and We also text-word searched Medical Library Association annual meeting poster and paper abstracts.

RESULTS

We identified 18 different roles filled by librarians and other information professionals in conducting systematic reviews from 310 different articles, book chapters, and presented papers and posters. Some roles were well known such as searching, source selection, and teaching. Other less documented roles included planning, question formulation, and peer review. We summarize these different roles and provide an accompanying bibliography of references for in-depth descriptions of these roles.

CONCLUSION

Librarians play central roles in systematic review teams, including roles that go beyond searching. This scoping review should encourage librarians who are fulfilling roles that are not captured here to document their roles in journal articles and poster and paper presentations.

摘要

目的

图书馆员和信息专业人员在开展系统评价中发挥着什么作用?图书馆员越来越多地被要求参与系统评价,但尚无研究考虑过图书馆员能够履行的所有角色。这份关于现有和新兴角色的清单有助于界定图书馆员的系统评价服务。

方法

对于这项范围综述,作者在PubMed、《图书馆、信息科学与技术文摘》和CINAHL数据库中进行了控制词汇检索和文本词检索。我们分别检索了[具体年份1]、[具体年份2]发表的文章。我们还对医学图书馆协会年会的海报和论文摘要进行了文本词检索。

结果

我们从310篇不同的文章、书籍章节以及发表的论文和海报中,确定了图书馆员和其他信息专业人员在开展系统评价时所扮演的18种不同角色。一些角色广为人知,如检索、来源选择和教学。其他记录较少的角色包括规划、问题制定和同行评审。我们总结了这些不同角色,并提供了一份参考文献书目,以便对这些角色进行深入描述。

结论

图书馆员在系统评价团队中发挥着核心作用,包括一些超越检索的角色。这项范围综述应鼓励那些履行了此处未涵盖角色的图书馆员,在期刊文章以及海报和论文展示中记录他们的角色。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bfe/5764593/1cd0b1492cb1/jmla-106-46-f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bfe/5764593/1cd0b1492cb1/jmla-106-46-f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bfe/5764593/1cd0b1492cb1/jmla-106-46-f001.jpg

相似文献

1
Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review.图书馆员在系统评价中的作用:一项范围综述
J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Jan;106(1):46-56. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2018.82. Epub 2018 Jan 2.
2
Assessing the roles and challenges of librarians in dental systematic and scoping reviews.评估图书馆员在牙科系统评价和范围综述中的作用与挑战。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2021 Jan 1;109(1):52-61. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2021.1031.
3
Benchmarking veterinary librarians' participation in systematic reviews and scoping reviews.兽医图书馆员参与系统评价和范围综述的基准测试。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2019 Oct;107(4):499-507. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2019.710. Epub 2019 Oct 1.
4
Reference librarians' perceptions of the issues they face as academic health information professionals.参考馆员对他们作为学术健康信息专业人员所面临问题的看法。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2004 Apr;92(2):226-32.
5
Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report.设计图书馆员系统评价能力课程建设框架:案例报告。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Oct 1;112(4):357-363. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1930. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
6
The librarian's roles in the systematic review process: a case study.图书馆员在系统评价过程中的角色:一项案例研究。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2005 Jan;93(1):81-7.
7
Reflective practice and health sciences librarians: engagement, benefits, and barriers.反思性实践与健康科学馆员:参与、收益与障碍。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2020 Jan;108(1):17-28. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2020.777. Epub 2020 Jan 1.
8
Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes.健康科学图书馆员的研究参与度:一项关于研究相关活动和态度的调查
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Apr;104(2):166-73. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.015.
9
Academic health sciences librarians' contributions to institutional animal care and use committees.学术健康科学图书馆员对机构动物护理与使用委员会的贡献。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2014 Jul;102(3):215-9. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.014.
10
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.

引用本文的文献

1
ChatGPT, Python, and Microsoft Excel.ChatGPT、Python和微软Excel。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2025 Jan 14;113(1):110-112. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2025.2065.
2
Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report.设计图书馆员系统评价能力课程建设框架:案例报告。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Oct 1;112(4):357-363. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1930. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
3
Large-scale systematic review support for guideline development in diabetes precision medicine.大规模系统综述支持糖尿病精准医学指南制定。

本文引用的文献

1
Reviewing retrieved references for inclusion in systematic reviews using EndNote.使用EndNote检索参考文献以纳入系统评价。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2017 Jan;105(1):84-87. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2017.111.
2
Scoping reviews: establishing the role of the librarian.综述性文献回顾:确定图书馆员的角色
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Oct;104(4):346-354. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.020.
3
Increasing number of databases searched in systematic reviews and meta-analyses between 1994 and 2014.1994年至2014年间,系统评价和荟萃分析中检索的数据库数量不断增加。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Jul 1;112(3):275-280. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1863. Epub 2024 Jul 29.
4
Effect of librarian collaboration on otolaryngology systematic review and meta-analysis quality.图书馆员协作对耳鼻喉科系统评价和荟萃分析质量的影响。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Jul 1;112(3):261-274. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1774. Epub 2024 Jul 29.
5
Exploring librarians' practices when teaching advanced searching for knowledge synthesis: results from an online survey.探讨图书馆员在教授知识综合高级检索方面的实践:一项在线调查的结果。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Jul 1;112(3):238-249. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1870. Epub 2024 Jul 29.
6
Searching for studies: A guide to information retrieval for Campbell systematic reviews.搜索研究:坎贝尔系统评价的信息检索指南
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Sep 10;20(3):e1433. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1433. eCollection 2024 Sep.
7
Recognizing the value of meta-research and making it easier to find.认识到元研究的价值并使其更易于查找。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2023 Oct 2;111(4):839-843. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2023.1758.
8
A decade of systematic reviews: an assessment of Weill Cornell Medicine's systematic review service.十年来的系统评价:对威尔·康奈尔医学院系统评价服务的评估。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2023 Jul 10;111(3):728-732. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2023.1628.
9
The case of the disappearing librarians: analyzing documentation of librarians' contributions to systematic reviews.消失的图书馆员案例:分析图书馆员对系统评价贡献的文献记录。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2022 Oct 1;110(4):409-418. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2022.1505.
10
Involvement of information specialists and statisticians in systematic reviews.系统评价中信息专家和统计学家的参与。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2023 Apr 25;39(1):e22. doi: 10.1017/S026646232300020X.
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Oct;104(4):284-289. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.006.
4
Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews.图书馆员对儿科系统评价文献检索部分报告的影响。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Oct;104(4):267-277. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.004.
5
De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote.在EndNote中对系统评价的数据库搜索结果进行去重。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jul;104(3):240-3. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.014.
6
Variation in number of hits for complex searches in Google Scholar.谷歌学术中复杂搜索命中次数的变化。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Apr;104(2):143-5. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.009.
7
PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement.电子检索策略的PRESS同行评审:2015年指南声明。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul;75:40-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021. Epub 2016 Mar 19.
8
Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study.比较Embase、MEDLINE和谷歌学术中120项系统评价的检索覆盖范围、召回率和精确率:一项前瞻性研究。
Syst Rev. 2016 Mar 1;5:39. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0215-7.
9
Identifying and removing duplicate records from systematic review searches.从系统评价检索中识别并去除重复记录。
J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Oct;103(4):184-8. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.004.
10
A systematic review protocol for reporting deficiencies within surgical case series.一份关于报告外科病例系列中缺陷的系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 5;5(10):e008007. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008007.