scholarly journals For Your Enrichment: A Model for Developing and Implementing a Systematic Review Service for Disciplines outside of the Health Sciences

2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Riegelman ◽  
Megan Kocher
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
The Social ◽  
Reference Librarians ◽  
Meta Analyses

Support for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the social sciences is an innovative service that makes advanced use of the expert skills of reference librarians and subject specialists. This column provides a deep look into the launch of one systematic review service to provide a model that is adaptable for other academic and special libraries.—Editor

scholarly journals Systematic reviews and evidence synthesis: Resources beyond the health sciences

2018 ◽  
Vol 79 (5) ◽  
pp. 248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Kocher ◽  
Amy Riegelman
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
University Of Minnesota ◽  
The Social ◽  
The University

Asystematic review is a type of review that “seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesis research evidence,”1 including results published in grey literature. For decades, systematic reviews have been widely used to synthesize evidence in the health sciences. More recently, other disciplines, such as agriculture and the social sciences, have seen a rise in systematic reviews and related research methodologies. In response to this development, both Cornell University2 and the University of Minnesota Libraries3 have launched systematic review services that explicitly cater to non-health-sciences researchers at their institutions. Because it is recommended that librarians play a part on systematic review teams,4 there is a need for resources and skill development in this area.

scholarly journals Evidentiary function of systematic reviews of scientific literature: Epistemological foundations and methodological derivatives

2021 ◽  
pp. 25-40
Author(s):  
N. S. Babich
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Scientific Communication ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
The Social ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
And Migration

The author analyzes implicit epistemological assumptions of the modern systematic reviews of scientific literatures that usually are left unconsidered or problematized. The foundations for building the image of scientific communication as representative, clearly cut and easily analyzed reflection of efficient search for and spread of truth which approaching is characterized by increased explorers’ consent. Generalization of this communication brings the evidential effect to advance argument in scientific discussions. However, a series of conditions for adequate conversion and «migration» of published conclusions into the conclusions of systematic review has to be provided to preserve evidential effect in summarizing analysis. The essential components of systematic reviewing methodology comprise: setting the task of obtaining quantified results; selection criteria for unambiguous correspondence between the model of process under scientific investigation and totality of publications; representative observation of relevant publications and making conclusions based on comparative evidential effect of research and consent level achieved. The systematic reviews compliant with the above requirements make them a powerful instrument of evidence in the social sciences, biology and medicine.

scholarly journals Systematic Reviews in Theory and Practice for Library and Information Studies

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (112) ◽  
pp. 6-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue F Phelps ◽  
Nicole Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Specific Question ◽  
The Social ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Care Field

This article is about the use of systematic reviews as a research methodology in library and information studies (LIS). A systematic review is an attempt to gather all of the research on a given topic in order to answer a specific question. They have been used extensively in the health care field and have more recently found their way into the social sciences, including librarianship. Examples of the use of systematic reviews in LIS illustrate the benefits and challenges to using this methodology. Included is a brief description of how to conduct a review and a reading list for further information.

scholarly journals How individual consultations with a librarian can support systematic reviews in the social sciences

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Dalton
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Qualitative Survey ◽  
The Social ◽  
Information Skills ◽  
Additional Value ◽  
Individual Consultation

The use of systematic review as a research method has become increasingly prevalent in the social and human sciences. However, the role of the librarian in delivering library and information skills (LIS) support in this area remains relatively undocumented, in contrast with the health sciences where systematic review support is often highly visible and embedded. This exploratory study uses qualitative survey data collected from researchers who attended an individual consultation with a librarian and aims to identify the potential role and impact that LIS support can have. The results indicate that both the skills and confidence of researchers increased as a result of the interaction, and that the personalised nature of the consultation provided additional value. However, awareness of the service was relatively low, indicating the need for additional marketing and promotion, as well as increased liaison and engagement with academic and research staff. These findings provide a foundation for further research into the design and delivery of LIS support to those undertaking systematic reviews in the social sciences.

scholarly journals Systematic Reviews in Political Science: What Can the Approach Contribute to Political Research?

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Dacombe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Political Research ◽  
The Social ◽  
Literature Reviews

Recent years have seen the growing use of systematic literature reviews within the social sciences. Despite some reservations over the adoption of an approach originally popularised within clinical and health sciences, the literature in the area has contributed some clear benefits to accounts of existing research. It is surprising, therefore, that political scientists have tended to ignore, or at best marginalise, reviews of this kind. This article outlines a number of features of systematic reviews which might be suitable for the kinds of questions political scientists ask of their data. Throughout, it highlights both the value and the potential complications of the approach, raising a number of questions which should be considered if systematic reviews are to be adopted more widely.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of psychological interventions in the treatment of perinatal depression: A systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Branquinho ◽  
María de la Fe Rodriguez-Muñoz ◽  
Berta Rodrigues Maia ◽  
Mariana Marques ◽  
Marcela Matos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Perinatal Depression ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Meta Analyses

scholarly journals Students’ preparedness for disasters in schools: a systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. e000913
Author(s):  
Hamed Seddighi ◽  
Homeira Sajjadi ◽  
Sepideh Yousefzadeh ◽  
Mónica López López ◽  
Meroe Vameghi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Disaster Preparedness ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Narrative Synthesis ◽  
Ethics Code ◽  
Study Characteristics ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Critical Appraisal Skills ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionChildren are one of the most vulnerable groups in disasters. Improving students’ knowledge and skills to prepare for disasters can play a major role in children’s health. School as a place to teach children can make a significant contribution to provide the necessary skills. This study aims to identify the effects, strengths and weaknesses of interventions in schools to prepare children for disasters.Methods and analysisWe use Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to develop a protocol for this systematic review. The included studies will report on the results of interventions targeting ‘schoolchildren’ defined as individuals between 4 and under 18 years old studying in schools. Different electronic databases will be used for a comprehensive literature search, including MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE to identify the records that match the mentioned inclusion criteria published till December 2020. The main search terms are ‘disaster’, ‘preparedness’, ‘children’ and ‘school’. Four types of data will be extracted from the qualified studies including study characteristics (study design, year of publication and geographical region where the study was conducted), participant characteristics (sample size, age and gender), intervention characteristics (aim of intervention, intervention facilitators and barriers) and intervention outcomes. The quality appraisal of the selected papers will be conducted using Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias for quantitative studies and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative studies. We use a narrative synthesis for this systematic review. The narrative synthesis refers to an approach to systematic reviews which focuses mostly on applying words and texts to summarise and explain findings.Ethics and disseminationThis paper is a part of a Ph.D. thesis of Hamed Seddighi at University of Social welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences with ethics code IR.USWR.REC.1399.008 approved by the Ethics Committee of the above-mentioned university.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020146536.

scholarly journals Consequences of the COVID-19 Syndemic for Nutritional Health: A Systematic Review

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1168
Author(s):  
Cristian Neira ◽  
Rejane Godinho ◽  
Fabio Rincón ◽  
Rodrigo Mardones ◽  
Janari Pedroso
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Physical Contact ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Study Objective ◽  
Eating Style ◽  
Healthy Nutrition ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Confinement at home, quarantine, and social distancing are some measures adopted worldwide to prevent the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2), which has been generating an important alteration in the routines and qualities of life of people. The impact on health is still being evaluated, and consequences in the nutritional field are not entirely clear. The study objective was to evaluate the current evidence about the impact that preventive measures of physical contact restriction causes in healthy nutrition. A systematic review was carried out according to the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” PRISMA Group and Cochrane method for rapid systematic reviews. Searching was performed in six electronic databases and evaluated articles published between 2010 and 2020, including among their participants adult subjects who had been exposed to the preventive measures of physical contact restriction. Seven studies met the selection criteria and reported an overall increase in food consumption, weight, Body Mass Index (BMI), and a change in eating style. Findings suggest that healthy nutrition is affected by preventive measures to restrict physical contact as a result of the COVID-19 syndemic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document