Angela Spencer

Bio: Angela Spencer is an academic researcher from Mount Sinai St. Luke's and Mount Sinai Roosevelt. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medical library & Systematic review. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 4 publications receiving 80 citations.

Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review

Abstract: Objective: What roles do librarians and information professionals play in conducting systematic reviews? Librarians are increasingly called upon to be involved in systematic reviews, but no study has considered all the roles that librarians can perform. This inventory of existing and emerging roles aids in defining librarians’ systematic reviews services. Methods: For this scoping review, the authors conducted controlled vocabulary and text-word searches in the PubMed; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; and CINAHL databases. We separately searched for articles published in the Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, the Journal of the Canadian Heath Libraries Association, and Hypothesis. We also text-word searched Medical Library Association annual meeting poster and paper abstracts. Results: We identified 18 different roles filled by librarians and other information professionals in conducting systematic reviews from 310 different articles, book chapters, and presented papers and posters. Some roles were well known such as searching, source selection, and teaching. Other less documented roles included planning, question formulation, and peer review. We summarize these different roles and provide an accompanying bibliography of references for in-depth descriptions of these roles. Conclusion: Librarians play central roles in systematic review teams, including roles that go beyond searching. This scoping review should encourage librarians who are fulfilling roles that are not captured here to document their roles in journal articles and poster and paper presentations. This article has been approved for the Medical Library Association’s Independent Reading Program .

Solo Census: Demographics, Duties, Needs And Challenges

Abstract: A 13-question survey was launched to determine the number, duties and challenges of medical or health science librarians who worked alone or with limited staff or volunteers. Results from 383 responses illustrate the depth and breadth of the solo workforce, and highlight the challenges faced by this segment of the profession. By presenting these data, we hope to make the Medical Library Association, and the health science librarianship profession at large, more sensitive to the needs of this special group, and advocate for the vital services offered by these solo librarians.

Literature Surveillance Tools: The Hospital Library Perspective

Abstract: In the olden days, a health professional could keep up with what’s new in the literature by browsing the covers of periodicals shelved in the current journals area and maybe quickly glancing at the...

Job Sharing: A Primer

Abstract: In 2016, a New York Times article talked about a study where some employees were given total control of their schedules as long as goals were met (1). The group that was given total control, compar...

Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements.

Abstract: Background and objectives The last decade has witnessed increased recognition of the value of literature reviews for advancing understanding and decision making. This has been accompanied by an expansion in the range of methodological approaches and types of review. However, there remains uncertainty over definitions and search requirements beyond those for the ‘traditional’ systematic review. This study aims to characterise health related reviews by type and to provide recommendations on appropriate methods of information retrieval based on the available guidance. Methods A list of review types was generated from published typologies and categorised into ‘families’ based on their common features. Guidance on information retrieval for each review type was identified by searching pubmed, medline and Google Scholar, supplemented by scrutinising websites of review producing organisations. Results Forty‐eight review types were identified and categorised into seven families. Published guidance reveals increasing specification of methods for information retrieval; however, much of it remains generic with many review types lacking explicit requirements for the identification of evidence. Conclusions Defining review types and utilising appropriate search methods remain challenging. By familiarising themselves with a range of review methodologies and associated search methods, information specialists will be better equipped to select suitable approaches for future projects.

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval.

Abstract: Objectives: Errors in search strategies negatively affect the quality and validity of systematic reviews. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate searches performed in MEDLINE/PubMed to identify errors and determine their effects on information retrieval. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted using the systematic review filter to identify articles that were published in January of 2018. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses were selected from a systematic search for literature containing reproducible and explicit search strategies in MEDLINE/PubMed. Data were extracted from these studies related to ten types of errors and to the terms and phrases search modes. Results: The study included 137 systematic reviews in which the number of search strategies containing some type of error was very high (92.7%). Errors that affected recall were the most frequent (78.1%), and the most common search errors involved missing terms in both natural language and controlled language and those related to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) search terms and the non-retrieval of their more specific terms. Conclusions: To improve the quality of searches and avoid errors, it is essential to plan the search strategy carefully, which includes consulting the MeSH database to identify the concepts and choose all appropriate terms, both descriptors and synonyms, and combining search techniques in the free-text and controlled-language fields, truncating the terms appropriately to retrieve all their variants.

Revisão sistemática da literatura: conceituação, produção e publicação

Abstract: Realizar uma revisao sistematica de literatura vai alem da atividade usual de fazer uma revisao de literatura como parte de um trabalho de pesquisa academica. A revisao sistematica e uma modalidade de pesquisa, que segue protocolos especificos e busca dar alguma logicidade a um grande corpus documental. Este artigo apresenta os aspectos essenciais no desenvolvimento de revisoes sistematicas da literatura. Apos a conceituacao e apresentacao dos diferentes tipos de revisao sistematica, sao abordadas as etapas de sua producao, desde a delimitacao da questao de pesquisa, a selecao das bases de dados, a elaboracao da estrategia de busca, a selecao dos documentos e a sistematizacao dos resultados. Por fim, sao abordados aspectos relacionados a divulgacao e publicacao de revisoes sistematicas de literatura. A compreensao desses aspectos e essencial nao apenas para autores desse tipo de pesquisa, mas tambem para revisores e editores de periodicos de todas as areas do conhecimento.