Cargando…

It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks

INTRODUCTION: The authors examined the time that medical librarians spent on specific tasks for systematic reviews (SRs): interview process, search strategy development, search strategy translation, documentation, deliverables, search methodology writing, and instruction. We also investigated relati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bullers, Krystal, Howard, Allison M., Hanson, Ardis, Kearns, William D., Orriola, John J., Polo, Randall L., Sakmar, Kristen A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medical Library Association 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5886502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29632442
http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.323
_version_ 1783312137278455808
author Bullers, Krystal
Howard, Allison M.
Hanson, Ardis
Kearns, William D.
Orriola, John J.
Polo, Randall L.
Sakmar, Kristen A.
author_facet Bullers, Krystal
Howard, Allison M.
Hanson, Ardis
Kearns, William D.
Orriola, John J.
Polo, Randall L.
Sakmar, Kristen A.
author_sort Bullers, Krystal
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The authors examined the time that medical librarians spent on specific tasks for systematic reviews (SRs): interview process, search strategy development, search strategy translation, documentation, deliverables, search methodology writing, and instruction. We also investigated relationships among the time spent on SR tasks, years of experience, and number of completed SRs to gain a better understanding of the time spent on SR tasks from time, staffing, and project management perspectives. METHODS: A confidential survey and study description were sent to medical library directors who were members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries as well as librarians serving members of the Association of American Medical Colleges or American Osteopathic Association. RESULTS: Of the 185 participants, 143 (77%) had worked on an SR within the last 5 years. The number of SRs conducted by participants during their careers ranged from 1 to 500, with a median of 5. The major component of time spent was on search strategy development and translation. Average aggregated time for standard tasks was 26.9 hours, with a median of 18.5 hours. Task time was unrelated to the number of SRs but was positively correlated with years of SR experience. CONCLUSION: The time required to conduct the librarian’s discrete tasks in an SR varies substantially, and there are no standard time frames. Librarians with more SR experience spent more time on instruction and interviews; time spent on all other tasks varied widely. Librarians also can expect to spend a significant amount of their time on search strategy development, translation, and writing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5886502
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medical Library Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58865022018-04-09 It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks Bullers, Krystal Howard, Allison M. Hanson, Ardis Kearns, William D. Orriola, John J. Polo, Randall L. Sakmar, Kristen A. J Med Libr Assoc Original Investigation INTRODUCTION: The authors examined the time that medical librarians spent on specific tasks for systematic reviews (SRs): interview process, search strategy development, search strategy translation, documentation, deliverables, search methodology writing, and instruction. We also investigated relationships among the time spent on SR tasks, years of experience, and number of completed SRs to gain a better understanding of the time spent on SR tasks from time, staffing, and project management perspectives. METHODS: A confidential survey and study description were sent to medical library directors who were members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries as well as librarians serving members of the Association of American Medical Colleges or American Osteopathic Association. RESULTS: Of the 185 participants, 143 (77%) had worked on an SR within the last 5 years. The number of SRs conducted by participants during their careers ranged from 1 to 500, with a median of 5. The major component of time spent was on search strategy development and translation. Average aggregated time for standard tasks was 26.9 hours, with a median of 18.5 hours. Task time was unrelated to the number of SRs but was positively correlated with years of SR experience. CONCLUSION: The time required to conduct the librarian’s discrete tasks in an SR varies substantially, and there are no standard time frames. Librarians with more SR experience spent more time on instruction and interviews; time spent on all other tasks varied widely. Librarians also can expect to spend a significant amount of their time on search strategy development, translation, and writing. Medical Library Association 2018-04 2018-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5886502/ /pubmed/29632442 http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.323 Text en Copyright: © 2018, Authors. Articles in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Bullers, Krystal
Howard, Allison M.
Hanson, Ardis
Kearns, William D.
Orriola, John J.
Polo, Randall L.
Sakmar, Kristen A.
It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title_full It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title_fullStr It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title_full_unstemmed It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title_short It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
title_sort it takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5886502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29632442
http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.323
work_keys_str_mv AT bullerskrystal ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT howardallisonm ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT hansonardis ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT kearnswilliamd ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT orriolajohnj ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT polorandalll ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks
AT sakmarkristena ittakeslongerthanyouthinklibrariantimespentonsystematicreviewtasks