Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project
Objectives: The Medical Library Association (MLA) Systematic Review Project aims to conduct systematic reviews to identify the state of knowledge and research gaps for fifteen top-ranked questions in the profession. In 2013, fifteen volunteer-driven teams were recruited to conduct the systematic rev...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
2018-07-01
|
| Series: | Journal of the Medical Library Association |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/286 |
| _version_ | 1811283626038394880 |
|---|---|
| author | Catherine Boden Marie T. Ascher Jonathan D. Eldredge |
| author_facet | Catherine Boden Marie T. Ascher Jonathan D. Eldredge |
| author_sort | Catherine Boden |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives: The Medical Library Association (MLA) Systematic Review Project aims to conduct systematic reviews to identify the state of knowledge and research gaps for fifteen top-ranked questions in the profession. In 2013, fifteen volunteer-driven teams were recruited to conduct the systematic reviews. The authors investigated the experiences of participants in this large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to answering priority research questions and fostering professional growth among health sciences librarians.
Methods: A program evaluation was conducted by inviting MLA Systematic Review Project team members to complete an eleven-item online survey. Multiple-choice and short-answer questions elicited experiences about outputs, successes and challenges, lessons learned, and future directions. Participants were recruited by email, and responses were collected over a two-week period beginning at the end of January 2016.
Results: Eighty (8 team leaders, 72 team members) of 198 potential respondents completed the survey. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated that the MLA Systematic Review Project should be repeated in the future and were interested in participating in another systematic review. Team outputs included journal articles, conference presentations or posters, and sharing via social media. Thematic analysis of the short-answer questions yielded five broad themes: learning and experience, interpersonal (networking), teamwork, outcomes, and barriers.
Discussion: A large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to performing systematic reviews shows promise as a model for answering key questions in the profession and demonstrates the value of experiential learning for acquiring synthesis review skills and knowledge. Our project evaluation provides recommendations to optimize this approach. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:14:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-80d82a1555c74dea920fc74888a35053 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1536-5050 1558-9439 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:14:57Z |
| publishDate | 2018-07-01 |
| publisher | University Library System, University of Pittsburgh |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of the Medical Library Association |
| spelling | doaj.art-80d82a1555c74dea920fc74888a350532022-12-22T03:07:11ZengUniversity Library System, University of PittsburghJournal of the Medical Library Association1536-50501558-94392018-07-01106310.5195/jmla.2018.286284Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review ProjectCatherine Boden0Marie T. Ascher1Jonathan D. Eldredge2Associate Librarian, Leslie and Irene Dube Health Sciences Library, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SKLillian Hetrick Huber Endowed Director, Health Sciences Library; Assistant Professor, School of Medicine; and Assistant Professor in Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Health Sciences and Practice; New York Medical College, Valhalla, NYAssociate Professor and Evidence Based and Translational Sciences Collaboration Coordinator, Biomedical Informatics Research, Training and Scholarship Unit, Health Sciences Library and Informatics Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NMObjectives: The Medical Library Association (MLA) Systematic Review Project aims to conduct systematic reviews to identify the state of knowledge and research gaps for fifteen top-ranked questions in the profession. In 2013, fifteen volunteer-driven teams were recruited to conduct the systematic reviews. The authors investigated the experiences of participants in this large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to answering priority research questions and fostering professional growth among health sciences librarians. Methods: A program evaluation was conducted by inviting MLA Systematic Review Project team members to complete an eleven-item online survey. Multiple-choice and short-answer questions elicited experiences about outputs, successes and challenges, lessons learned, and future directions. Participants were recruited by email, and responses were collected over a two-week period beginning at the end of January 2016. Results: Eighty (8 team leaders, 72 team members) of 198 potential respondents completed the survey. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated that the MLA Systematic Review Project should be repeated in the future and were interested in participating in another systematic review. Team outputs included journal articles, conference presentations or posters, and sharing via social media. Thematic analysis of the short-answer questions yielded five broad themes: learning and experience, interpersonal (networking), teamwork, outcomes, and barriers. Discussion: A large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to performing systematic reviews shows promise as a model for answering key questions in the profession and demonstrates the value of experiential learning for acquiring synthesis review skills and knowledge. Our project evaluation provides recommendations to optimize this approach.http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/286Program EvaluationMedical LibrariesLearningSystematic ReviewsLibrary ScienceProfessional RoleProfessionalismInformation Services, Evidence-Based PracticeInternational CooperationExperiential Learning |
| spellingShingle | Catherine Boden Marie T. Ascher Jonathan D. Eldredge Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project Journal of the Medical Library Association Program Evaluation Medical Libraries Learning Systematic Reviews Library Science Professional Role Professionalism Information Services, Evidence-Based Practice International Cooperation Experiential Learning |
| title | Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project |
| title_full | Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project |
| title_fullStr | Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project |
| title_full_unstemmed | Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project |
| title_short | Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project |
| title_sort | learning while doing program evaluation of the medical library association systematic review project |
| topic | Program Evaluation Medical Libraries Learning Systematic Reviews Library Science Professional Role Professionalism Information Services, Evidence-Based Practice International Cooperation Experiential Learning |
| url | http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/286 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT catherineboden learningwhiledoingprogramevaluationofthemedicallibraryassociationsystematicreviewproject AT marietascher learningwhiledoingprogramevaluationofthemedicallibraryassociationsystematicreviewproject AT jonathandeldredge learningwhiledoingprogramevaluationofthemedicallibraryassociationsystematicreviewproject |