A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides
Objective – Online library guides can serve as resources for students and researchers conducting systematic literature reviews. There is a need to develop learner-centered library guides to build capacity for systematic review skills. The objective of this study was to explore the content of existin...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Alberta
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | Evidence Based Library and Information Practice |
| Online Access: | https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/29819 |
| _version_ | 1818879203483844608 |
|---|---|
| author | Jennifer Lee K. Alix Hayden Heather Ganshorn Helen Pethrick |
| author_facet | Jennifer Lee K. Alix Hayden Heather Ganshorn Helen Pethrick |
| author_sort | Jennifer Lee |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective – Online library guides can serve as resources for students and researchers conducting systematic literature reviews. There is a need to develop learner-centered library guides to build capacity for systematic review skills. The objective of this study was to explore the content of existing systematic review library guides at research universities.
Methods – We conducted a content analysis of systematic review library guides from English-speaking universities. We identified 18 institutions for inclusion using a Scopus search to find the institutions with the highest number of systematic review publications. We conducted a content analysis of those institutions’ library guides, coding for the types of resources included, and the stage of the systematic review process to which they referred. A chi-square test was used to determine whether the differences in distribution of the resource types within each systematic review stage were statistically significant.
Results – The most common type of resource was informational in content. Only 24% of the content analysed was educational. The most common stage of the systematic review process was conducting searches. The chi-square test revealed significant differences for seven of the nine systematic review stages.
Conclusion – We found that many library guides were heavily informational and lacking in instructional and skills focused content. There is a significant opportunity for librarians to turn their systematic review guides into practical learning tools through the development and assessment of online instructional tools to support student and researcher learning. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T14:26:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-66802bcda54549b9b1e0f7175de088ff |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1715-720X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T14:26:20Z |
| publishDate | 2021-03-01 |
| publisher | University of Alberta |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Evidence Based Library and Information Practice |
| spelling | doaj.art-66802bcda54549b9b1e0f7175de088ff2022-12-21T20:17:36ZengUniversity of AlbertaEvidence Based Library and Information Practice1715-720X2021-03-0116110.18438/eblip29819A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library GuidesJennifer Lee0K. Alix Hayden1Heather Ganshorn2Helen Pethrick3University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, CanadaObjective – Online library guides can serve as resources for students and researchers conducting systematic literature reviews. There is a need to develop learner-centered library guides to build capacity for systematic review skills. The objective of this study was to explore the content of existing systematic review library guides at research universities. Methods – We conducted a content analysis of systematic review library guides from English-speaking universities. We identified 18 institutions for inclusion using a Scopus search to find the institutions with the highest number of systematic review publications. We conducted a content analysis of those institutions’ library guides, coding for the types of resources included, and the stage of the systematic review process to which they referred. A chi-square test was used to determine whether the differences in distribution of the resource types within each systematic review stage were statistically significant. Results – The most common type of resource was informational in content. Only 24% of the content analysed was educational. The most common stage of the systematic review process was conducting searches. The chi-square test revealed significant differences for seven of the nine systematic review stages. Conclusion – We found that many library guides were heavily informational and lacking in instructional and skills focused content. There is a significant opportunity for librarians to turn their systematic review guides into practical learning tools through the development and assessment of online instructional tools to support student and researcher learning.https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/29819 |
| spellingShingle | Jennifer Lee K. Alix Hayden Heather Ganshorn Helen Pethrick A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides Evidence Based Library and Information Practice |
| title | A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides |
| title_full | A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides |
| title_fullStr | A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides |
| title_short | A Content Analysis of Systematic Review Online Library Guides |
| title_sort | content analysis of systematic review online library guides |
| url | https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/eblip/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/29819 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jenniferlee acontentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT kalixhayden acontentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT heatherganshorn acontentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT helenpethrick acontentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT jenniferlee contentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT kalixhayden contentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT heatherganshorn contentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides AT helenpethrick contentanalysisofsystematicreviewonlinelibraryguides |