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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |