Skip to main content

The Role of Information Specialists in Reviews for Education Research

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Information Literacy in a Post-Truth Era (ECIL 2021)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1533))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1650 Accesses

Abstract

In the described dissertation project, the impact of information specialists in literature searches will be examined. A data corpus of current review publications in education research was generated in order to find out what role information specialists have in review processes. This data corpus forms the basis of a textual analysis which examines methodologies used in the identified reviews. Additionally, the analysis identifies if the role and tasks of information specialists are mentioned. To assess the quality of the searches in reviews, criteria for a successful literature search in education research have to be defined in an assessment model. Furthermore, required competencies for a high quality literature search will be determined to build a competence framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gore, G.C., Jones, J.: Systematic reviews and librarians: a primer for managers. Partnership: Can. J. Libr. Inf. Pract. Res. 10(1), 1–16 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beelmann, A.: Möglichkeiten und grenzen systematischer evidenzkumulation durch forschungssynthesen in der bildungsforschung. Z. Erzieh. 17, 55–78 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-014-0509-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Booth, A., Sutton, A., Papaioannou, D.: Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review, Second edition. SAGE, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gough, D., Thomas, J., Oliver, S.: Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Syst. Rev. 1, 28 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gough, D., Oliver, S.: An Introduction to Systematic Reviews, 2nd edition. SAGE, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC, Melbourne (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cooper, H., Hedges, L.V., Valentine, J.C.: The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fink, A.: Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. Sage Publications (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Petticrew, M., Roberts, H.: Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell, Malden (2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Zawacki-Richter, O., et al. (eds.): Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology. Perspectives and Application. Springer Nature, Berlin (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Polanin, J.R., Maynard, B.R., Dell, N.A.: Overviews in education research. Rev. Educ. Res. 87, 172–203 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316631117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuhberg-Lasson, V., Singleton, K., Sondergeld, U.: Publikationscharakteristika im interdisziplinären feld der bildungsforschung (Publication characteristics in the interdisciplinary field of educational research). J. Educ. Res. Online 6, 134–155 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Anne Wade, C., Turner, H.M., Rothstein, H.R., Lavenberg, J.G.: Information retrieval and the role of the information specialist in producing high-quality systematic reviews in the social, behavioural and education sciences. Evid. Policy: J. Research, Debate and Practice 2, 89–108 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1332/174426406775249705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kugley, S., et al.: Searching for studies: a guide to information retrieval for campbell systematic reviews. Campbell Syst. Rev. 13, 1–73 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4073/cmg.2016.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Higgins, J.P.T.: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. https://web.archive.org/web/20200806202112/https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current. (2019)

  15. Rethlefsen, M.L., Farrell, A.M., Trzasko, L.C.O., Brigham, T.J.: Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 68, 617–626 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Koffel, J.B.: Use of recommended search strategies in systematic reviews and the impact of librarian involvement: a cross-sectional survey of recent authors. PLoS ONE 10, e0125931 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Harris, M.R.: The Librarian’s roles in the systematic review process: a case study. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 93, 81–87 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Beverley, C.A., Booth, A., Bath, P.A.: The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study. Health Info. Libr. J. 20, 65–74 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-1842.2003.00411.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Eskrootchi, R., Mohammadi, A.S., Panahi, S., Zahedi, R.: Librarians’ participation in the systematic reviews published by iranian researchers and its impact on the quality of reporting search strategy. EBLIP 15, 69–84 (2020). https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Meert, D., Torabi, N., Costella, J.: Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews. J. Med. Libr. Assoc.: JMLA 104, 267 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang, L., Sampson, M., McGowan, J.: Reporting of the role of the expert searcher in cochrane reviews. EBLIP 1, 3 (2006). https://doi.org/10.18438/B85K52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Aamodt, M., Huurdeman, H., Strømme, H.: Librarian co-authored systematic reviews are associated with lower risk of bias compared to systematic reviews with acknowledgement of librarians or no participation by librarians. EBLIP 14, 103–127 (2019). https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ross-White, A.: Librarian involvement in systematic reviews at queen’s university: an environmental scan. J. Can. Health Libr. Assoc. 37(2), 39–43 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Grant, M.J., Booth, A.: A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info. Libr. J. 26, 91–108 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. National Institute for Health ad Care Excellence: Developing NICE Guidelines: the Manual (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Whiting, P., et al.: ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 69, 225–234 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shea, B.J., et al.: Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 7, 10 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rethlefsen, M.L., et al.: PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 10(1), 1–19 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  29. McGowan, J., et al.: PRESS - Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Explanation and Elaboration, Ottawa (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bates, M.J.: Information search tactics. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 30, 205–214 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630300406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Townsend, W.A., et al.: A competency framework for librarians involved in systematic reviews. J. Med. Libr. Assoc.: JMLA 105, 268 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carolin Keller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Keller, C. (2022). The Role of Information Specialists in Reviews for Education Research. In: KurbanoÄŸlu, S., Å piranec, S., Ãœnal, Y., Boustany, J., Kos, D. (eds) Information Literacy in a Post-Truth Era. ECIL 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1533. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99885-1_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99885-1_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-99884-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-99885-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics