J Med Libr Assoc. 2024 Jul 1;112(3):275-280. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2024.1863. Epub 2024 Jul 29.
Involving librarians as team members can lead to better quality in reviews. To improve their search results, an international diabetes project involved two medical librarians in a large-scale project planning of a series of systematic reviews for clinical guidelines in diabetes precision medicine.
The precision diabetes project was divided into teams. Four diabetes mellitus types (type 1, type 2, gestational, and monogenic) were divided into teams focusing on diagnostics, prevention, treatment, or prognostics. A search consultation plan was set up for the project to help organize the work. We performed searches in Embase and PubMed for 14 teams, building complex searches that involved non-traditional search strategies. Our search strategies generated very large amounts of records that created challenges in balancing sensitivity with precision. We also performed overlap searches for type 1 and type 2 diabetes search strategies; and assisted in setting up reviews in the Covidence tool for screening.
This project gave us opportunities to test methods we had not used before, such as overlap comparisons between whole search strategies. It also gave us insights into the complexity of performing a search balancing sensitivity and specificity and highlights the need for a clearly defined communication plan for extensive evidence synthesis projects.
让图书馆员作为团队成员可以提高评审的质量。为了改善搜索结果，一个国际糖尿病项目让两名医学图书馆员参与了一项大规模的项目规划，该项目涉及一系列针对糖尿病精准医学临床指南的系统评价。
精准糖尿病项目分为多个团队。四种糖尿病类型（1 型、2 型、妊娠型和单基因型）分为专注于诊断、预防、治疗或预后的团队。该项目设立了搜索咨询计划，以帮助组织工作。我们在 Embase 和 PubMed 中为 14 个团队进行了搜索，构建了涉及非传统搜索策略的复杂搜索。我们的搜索策略生成了大量的记录，这在平衡敏感性和精确性方面带来了挑战。我们还对 1 型和 2 型糖尿病的搜索策略进行了重叠搜索；并协助在 Covidence 工具中设置了筛选的评价。
该项目使我们有机会测试以前未使用过的方法，例如整个搜索策略之间的重叠比较。它还使我们深入了解在搜索中平衡敏感性和特异性的复杂性，并强调需要为广泛的证据综合项目制定明确的沟通计划。
