Attending the July Systematic Reviews Workshop at the University of Pittsburgh

We examined several types of reviews. Despite following the same standards (e.g. Institute of Medicine and PRISMA), some SRs may be of poor quality. I am planning on incorporating the information we learned about report bias in SRs in a September workshop in my library at the University of Akron. At the Welcome Reception, I met my librarian colleagues. The class consisted of 24 academic and hospital librarians who came as far away as California and Florida and included other non-health sciences librarians: one engineering and one instruction librarian. I enjoyed visiting the scenic Duquesne Incline and the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh.  The host city had an extensive banquet of food choices that were in close proximity to the Falk Library. A friend from Pittsburgh told me that the city has over 700 bridges!  It was clear to us that the SR process is not easy—it is time-consuming, complex, challenging but it can be rewarding in supporting researchers.  Not all libraries represented had a formal SR service. The first day of the class focused on theoretical concepts such as introduction to systematic reviews, study design, advice on the reference interview and communicating with the SR team. The instructors gave us examples and urged librarians to always ask for the protocol from the SR team. Clear and ongoing communication is essential. I was surprised at the number of resources, including open access resources that index SRs. On the second day, we concentrated on the h...
Source: The Cornflower - Category: Databases & Libraries Authors: Tags: Blog Funding Source Type: news