Objectives: Systematic reviews (SRs) are considered the gold standard of evidence, but many published SRs are of poor quality. This study identifies how librarian involvement in SRs is associated with quality-reported methods and examines the lack of motivation for involving a librarian in SRs.
Study design and setting: We searched databases for SRs that were published by a first or last author affiliated to a Vancouver hospital or biomedical research site and published between 2015 and 2019. Corresponding authors of included SRs were contacted through an e-mail survey to determine if a librarian was involved in the SR. If a librarian was involved in the SR, the survey asked at what level the librarian was involved and if a librarian was not involved, the survey asked why. Quality of reported search methods was scored independently by two reviewers. A linear regression model was used to determine the association between quality of reported search methods scores and the level at which a librarian was involved in the study.
Results: One hundred ninety one SRs were included in this study and 118 (62%) of the SRs authors indicated whether a librarian was involved in the SR. SRs that included a librarian as a co-author had a 15.4% higher quality assessment score than SRs that did not include a librarian. Most authors (27; 75%) who did not include a librarian in their SR did not do so because they did not believe it was necessary.
Conclusion: Higher level of librarian involvement in SRs is correlated with higher scores in reported search methods. Greater advocacy or changes at the policy level is necessary to increase librarian involvement in SRs and as a result the quality of their search methods.
Keywords: Attitude; Barriers to evidence; Librarian contribution; Library services; Methodological quality; Reporting; Research collaboration; Search methods; Systematic review.
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.