





































ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  5                                                                                

 

MLA Research Section’s Research Agenda Committee 
Systematic Review Project: A Status Report 
 

Marie T. Ascher, MS, MPH, AHIP 
Lillian Hetrick Huber Endowed Director 

Health Sciences Library  

New York Medical College  

Valhalla, NY 

Jonathan D. Eldredge, MLS, PhD, AHIP 
Associate Professor 

Evidence Based and Translational Science Collaboration Coordinator  

Health Science Library & Informatics Center  Biomedical Informatics Research, Training, and 

Scholarship Unit  

University of New Mexico 

Albuquerque, NM 
jeldredge@salud.unm.edu 

BACKGROUND 

Ambitious intentions, however well-conceived and embraced, can take time to manifest. Our 

elected and appointed MLA leaders have encouraged us for over 20 years to integrate the best 

evidence into our professional practices. These broad-based investments at the policy level now 

are yielding tangible results. 

 

The first MLA research policy, Using Scientific Evidence to Inform Practice, emphasized applying 

research evidence when making decisions [1]. This 1995 policy statement, along with MLA 

President Rachel Anderson’s 1997 inaugural address, helped spark the international Evidence 

Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP) movement that continues to thrive today [2, 3, 

4]. In fact, most MLA presidents since 1997 have called on us to integrate research evidence 

into our practices [5]. 

 

The newest MLA research policy, The Research Imperative, called for the Research Section to 

articulate an MLA research agenda [6]. The Research Section’s Research Agenda Committee 



ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  6                                                                                

 

conducted two Delphi studies in 2008 and 2011 to identify the most important and answerable 

research questions facing the profession [7]. The second Delphi study led the Committee to 

develop guidelines for voluntary teams to create systematic reviews for assembling the best 

evidence to form the tentative answers to each of the 15 top-ranked research questions [8]. 

The teams were to act largely autonomously. The 15 teams, consisting of over 200 medical 

librarians worldwide have made progress, for the most part, in completing their systematic 

reviews [9, 10]. The principal benefits of these systematic reviews will be as evidence resources 

for answering these top-ranked questions in addition to acting as blueprints pointing to further 

research needed to build our knowledge base strategically. 

 

Health sciences librarians have been integral members of systematic review teams outside 

librarianship since the 1990s, particularly in medicine [11, 12, 13, 14, 15]. Many guidelines and 

experts on systematic reviews point to the need for librarians to serve on systematic review 

teams [16, 17, 18]. Our own profession has produced over 90 systematic reviews on subjects 

related to library and information practice [19]. These systematic reviews frequently confirm 

the recurring observation that our own knowledge base lacks sufficient amounts of rigorous 

research evidence. A large percentage of our evidence also resides within the gray literature 

rather than the peer reviewed literature, which poses challenges to identification and critical 

appraisal. 

 

This paper provides a status report on the MLA Research Section’s Research Agenda Committee 

Systematic Review Project. There has not been a comprehensive report on the project since the 

2015 Open Forum held at the Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association in Austin, TX, 

where representatives from all active teams provided reports [20]. To date, teams have 

continued to vary in their rate of progress. Some teams have moved through the process 

relatively quickly while others are regrouping. An evaluation of the overall project experience 

from the point of view of the participants is forthcoming. 

METHOD & RESULTS 

To complete this inventory of progress, the fifteen team leaders were surveyed as to their 

current progress and to report any research outputs to date. The status categories they had to 



ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  7                                                                                

 

choose from represent discrete phases of the systematic review process: 1) Not started or 

regrouping; 2) Very early: Question clarification or earlier; 3) Early: Search strategy 

development 4) Mid: Screening abstracts; 4) Late mid: Screening articles; 5) Later: Data 

extraction and analysis; 6) Nearing completion: Manuscript preparation; 7) Complete and 

published. All teams with current leadership responded. The remaining two were described by 

the first author of this paper as “not started.” There is one team currently without an assigned 

team leader and has stalled at square one as of this writing. Results of this inquiry are reported 

in Table 1. 

 

Table 1. Team Leaders’ Reported Team Progress 

 

 

Three of the fifteen teams have completed their reviews and published articles. Six other teams 

are late in the systematic review process, two teams are in the middle, and four teams are very 

early in the process. Three teams are either regrouping or currently without leadership. The 

loss of leadership has been an issue for several teams throughout this ambitious project. Table 

2 lists status by team and research outputs, including publication and presentation information. 

3

1

0

1

1

4

2

3

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%

Not started

Very early

Early

Mid

Late mid

Later

Nearing

Complete



ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  8                                                                                

 

The original questions that emerged from the second Delphi study [7] are listed although teams 

were tasked with reworking their questions to make them suitable for conducting a review. 

 

Table 2. Team Progress and Research Outputs 

Team # 1. 

Question: There are still a number of relevant questions from the 2008 research agenda, but 

to me this is most critical: "What is the quantifiable evidence that the presence of a librarian, 

not just information resources, improves patient outcomes, increases research dollars, 

improves student outcomes (e.g., better board scores), or increases hospital intelligence (e.g., 

if the top hospitals have access to hospital librarians/libraries)?" 

Status:  Complete and published 

Presentations: 

Perrier L, Farrell A, Weiss A, Lightfoot D, Aaronson E, Connor E, Epstein Brown HA, 

Muellenbach JM, Allee N, Ayala P, Kenny T, Constantinescu T, Brigham T. Effects of librarian-

provided services in health care: a systematic review. [Contributed Paper.] Proceedings of the 

Canadian Health Libraries Association/Association des Bibliothèques de la Santé du Canada. 

2014 June 16-20. Montreal, QC, Canada. J Can Health Libr Assoc. 2014; 34(2):92-93. 

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jchla/index.php/jchla/article/view/22905/17060 

Publications: 

Perrier L, Farrell A, Ayala AP, Lightfoot D, Kenny T, Aaronson E, Allee N, Brigham T, Connor E, 

Constantinescu T, Muellenbach J, Epstein HA, Weiss A. Effects of librarian-provided services 

in healthcare settings: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(6):1118-24. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4215058/  Note: This paper was the winner 

of the 2015 Ida and George Eliot Prize which is given to the authors of the work published in 

the preceding calendar year that has been judge most effective in furthering medical 

librarianship. 

Team # 2. 

Question: Is there a significant difference in patient outcomes (or research output or 

educational outcomes) between institutions with and without libraries? 

Status:  Very early – question clarification 

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jchla/index.php/jchla/article/view/22905/17060
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4215058/


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  9                                                                                

 

Team # 3. 

Question: What is the added value libraries bring to education, research, and patient care in 

the health sciences and health care fields? Even if it is not possible to quantify benefits, 

documenting qualitative research results rigorous enough to stand the scrutiny of 

administrators and researchers would be of great value. 

Status:  Later - data extraction and analysis 

Team # 4. 

Question: Low health literacy can result in medication errors, noncompliance of treatment 

regimes, poor health outcomes and even death. What is the role of the medical librarian with 

health care providers, community organizations, local public libraries and members of the 

public to improve health literacy among entire communities? 

Status:  Later – data extraction and analysis 

Presentations: 

Klem M, Devine PJ, El-Khayat YM, Gutzman KE, Knehans A, Mills TN, Oren GA, Perryman CL, 

Saleh AA, Unno ZP, Vardell E. Librarians and health literacy: A scoping review. Presented at: 

Medical Library Association Annual Meeting. 2015 May 14-20. Austin TX. 

http://www.mlanet.org/d/do/1924 

Team # 5. 

Question: What are the information needs of practicing physicians and other health care 

workers? The 1985 Covell article is still heavily cited but was published way back in 1985.  The 

information environment has changed dramatically. We need to update that study in lite of 

new educational strategies, resources, technology and social networks. 

Status:  Nearing completion - manuscript preparation 

Team # 6 

Question: The explosion of information, expanding of technology (especially mobile 

technology), and complexity of healthcare environment present medical librarians and 

medical libraries opportunities and challenges. To live up to the opportunities and challenges, 

what kinds of skill sets or information structure do medical librarians or medical libraries are 

required to have or acquire so as to be strong partners or contributors of continuing 

effectiveness to the changing environment? 

Status:  Nearing completion – manuscript preparation 

Presentations: 

http://www.mlanet.org/d/do/1924


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  10                                                                                

 

Anderson PF, Bickett S, Doucette J, Herring PR, Kammerer J, Kepsel A, Lyons T, McLachlan S, 

Tonnison I, Wu L.  Tools for Building Our Information Future: Emerging Technologies Vital to 

Medical Libraries”  Health Library Group Conference, Chartered Institute of Library and 

Information Professionals. 2014 July 24-25. University of Oxford, U.K. 

 

Anderson PF, Bickett S, Doucette J, Herring PR, Kammerer J, Kepsel A, Lyons T, McLachlan S, 

Tonnison I, Wu L.  “Tools for Building Our Information Future: Emerging Technologies Vital to 

Medical Libraries.” [Poster.] Annual Meeting Medical Library Association. 2014 May 16–21. 

Chicago, IL.   NOTE: This poster won an 2014 MLA Research Section, Research Award: Posters, 

Honorable Mention 

 

Anderson PF, Bickett S, Doucette J, Herring PR, Kammerer J, Kepsel A, Lyons T, McLachlan S, 

Tonnison I, Wu L. Future Technological Practices: Medical Librarians’ Skills and Information 

Structures for Continued Effectiveness in a Changing Environment. 2014 May 16–21. Annual 

Meeting Medical Library Association, Chicago, IL. 

 

Anderson PF, Bickett S, Doucette J, Herring PR, Kammerer J, Kepsel A, Lyons T, McLachlan S, 

Tonnison I, Wu L. Tools for Building Our Information Future: Emerging Technologies Vital to 

Medical Libraries. 2014 September 19. HLI/HLA Joint Conference 2014. State Library of 

Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 

https://www.alia.org.au/sites/default/files/HLA%20News-Conference2014.pdf. 

  

Anderson PF, Bickett S, Doucette J, Herring PR, Kepsel A, Lyons T, McLachlan S, Shannon C, 

Wu L. Developing a Replicable Methodology for Automated Identification of Emerging 

Technologies in Healthcare. Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2016 May 

13–18. Toronto, Canada. 

Team # 7. 

Question: Does what we do matter?  Longer form:  Do the resources we provide - materials, 

reference services, and educational offerings - make a difference to our customers - save lives, 

shorten length of stay, improved educational outcomes, increase research dollars, improve 

research results?  

Status:  Late mid - screening articles 

https://www.alia.org.au/sites/default/files/HLA%20News-Conference2014.pdf


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  11                                                                                

 

Presentations: 

Glynn LA, Sakmar K, Lalla NJ, Berry R, Kim C, Geldenhuys PR, Lawton A, Siebert JL, McClurg C, 

Clemans-Taylor L, Gadd K, Ettien A. The Value to and Impact of Health Sciences Libraries and 

Information Services on Academic and Clinical Practices: A Systematic Review. [Paper.] 

Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2014 May 16–21. Chicago, IL. 

Team # 8. 

Question: How do we provide information support in a clinical world that functions based on 

electronic medical records systems and other similar informatics platforms and tools. What is 

the library's role, if any, in providing preclinical education with respect to informatics 

applications like electronic medical records systems? 

Status:  Mid - screening abstracts 

Team # 9. 

Question: Do health sciences libraries and librarians have any measureable (statistically 

significant) positive impacts on consumer health, the outcomes of medical care, the 

productivity of biomedical researchers and the knowledge obtained by graduates of 

biomedical and health sciences training programs, and at what total cost? 

Status:  Later - data extraction and analysis 

Presentations: 

Henderson ME, Crum JA, Fatkin KJ, Gagnon M-M, Nguyen T, Taylor M, and Vrabel M. Do 

Health Sciences Libraries and Librarians Have an Impact on the Cost of Health Care and 

Research? A Systematic Review. [Poster.] Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 

2015 May 14-20. Austin, TX. http://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/libraries_present/43/  

Team # 10. 

Question: How best to objectively document library/librarian impact on the 'bottom line' 

(time, money saved, shorter length of stay, ROI for expensive electronic resources, support 

training programs/Magnet status, funded research support, etc.)? 

Status: Completed and published 

Presentations: 

Collins, P. Counter-measures: a systematic review of the measurement tools used to 

demonstrate the impact of libraries in a clinical setting. [Presentation.] Health Libraries 

Group. 2016 Sept 15-16. Scarborough, United Kingdom. 

http://www.cilip.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/pam_collins.pdf. 

http://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/libraries_present/43/
http://www.cilip.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/pam_collins.pdf


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  12                                                                                

 

 

Madden A. "You say tomayto…”: Alternative viewpoints on international collaboration. 

[Presentation.] Health Libraries Group 2014 July 24. Oxford, United Kingdom. 

https://www.cilip.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Anne%20Madden.pdf 

Publications: 

Madden A, Collins P, McGowan S, Stevenson P, Castelli D, Hyde L, DeSanto K, O'Brien N, 

Purdon M, Delgado D. 2016. Demonstrating the financial impact of clinical libraries: a 

systematic review. Health Info Lib J. 2016; 33(3):172-189. 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hir.12151/abstract 

Team # 11. 

Question: As a profession, how do we measure our impact in our environment—be it clinical 

or academic—in such a way that it influences the decision makers in our institutions?    [I 

"stole" this from the previous study, but I think that it is still the most important question 

facing us.] 

Status:  Not started – regrouping 

Team # 12. 

Question: Does the intervention/instruction/assistance of a professional medical librarian 

have a long term impact on the information seeking behaviors of health care professionals? 

Status:  Not started – regrouping 

Team # 13.  

Question: What are the most effective instructional methods for teaching 

informatics/knowledge management/EBP within health sciences curricula? 

Status:  Complete and published 

Presentations: 

Pannabecker V, Dennison CC, Holyoke AN, Farrell A, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, 

Swanberg SM, Thuna M. Creative convergence: Conducting a systematic review project 

through cross-institutional, distance collaboration. [Presentation.] QuintEssential Joint 

Chapter Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2014 Oct 14. Denver, CO. 

https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/50634  

 

Holyoke AN, Dennison CC, Farrell A, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, Pannabecker V, 

Swanberg SM, Thuna M. Systematically assessing methods used by librarians to teach 

https://www.cilip.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Anne%20Madden.pdf
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hir.12151/abstract
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/50634


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  13                                                                                

 

evidence-based practice: What works best. [Presentation.] QuintEssential Joint Chapter 

Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2014 Oct 14. Denver, CO. 

 

Dennison CC, Farrell A, Gore G, Swanberg SM, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, Pannabecker 

V, Thuna M. Effectiveness of Instructional Methods Used by Librarians for Teaching Evidence 

Based Practice: A Systematic Review. Canadian Health Libraries Association Annual Meeting. 

2014 June 20. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 

 

Farrell A, Dennison CC, Gore G, Holyoke AN, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, Pannabecker V, 

Swanberg SM, Thuna M. An Initiation to Systematic Review. Hawaii-Pacific Chapter of the 

Medical Library Association Annual meeting. 2014 April 4. Honolulu, HI.  

 

Publications: 

Swanberg SM, Dennison CC, Farrell A, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, Pannabecker V, Thuna 

M, Holyoke AN. Instructional methods used by health sciences librarians to teach evidence-

based practice (EBP): a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jul; 104(3): 197–208. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4915637/ 

Team # 14. 

Question: In medical schools where librarians are included in the curriculum, do the students 

have a greater degree of information literacy than students in schools where librarians are 

not part of the curriculum? 

Status:  Not started - regrouping 

Team # 15. 

Question: What skills and knowledge must librarians possess in order to be able to design 

tools to help researchers visualize, mine, and otherwise manage large and complex data 

gathered during both quantitative and qualitative research? 

Status:  Later - data extraction and analysis 

Presentations: 

Boden C, Adamczyk A, Ambriz L, Billman BL, Booth A, Clark E, Engwall K, Johnson R, Miller-

Nesbitt A, Morris M, Woznica A. Librarian knowledge and skills of tools for visualizing, mining 

and managing large and complex research data:  A systematic review. [Poster.] Annual 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4915637/


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  14                                                                                

 

Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2015 May 14-20. Austin, TX. 

http://eventscribe.com/2015/MLA/TwitterPoster.asp?PosterID=38894 

 

Miller-Nesbitt A, Boden C, Adamczyk A, Ambriz L, Billman BL, Booth A, Clark E, Engwall K, 

Johnson R, Morris M, Woznica A. Applying the best-fit framework to systematic review data 

extraction. [Presentation.] 7th Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries 

International Conference (QQML2015). 2015 May 26-29. Paris, France. 

 

Morris M, Boden C & Nesbitt-Smith A. (2014). Distributed collaborative virtual systematic 

reviewing: A blueprint for the future? [Presentation.] Canadian Health Libraries Association 

Annual Meeting, June 16-20, 2014, Montreal, QB. 

https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jchla/index.php/jchla/article/view/22906/17075 

DISCUSSION 

Fifteen teams conducting systematic reviews on the top-ranked research questions met with 

varying success. One of the teams completed their systematic review in about a year and their 

paper was the 2015 winner of the Medical Library Association’s Ida and George Eliot Prize, 

awarded annually for a work that has been judged most effective in furthering medical 

librarianship [21]. Others have moved more slowly, but most are on track to completion. The 

project has resulted in presentations at meetings in the US, Australia, France, Canada, and the 

UK and three important systematic review papers have been published so far [21, 22, 23] with 

several in the pipeline. Future work of the Committee involves a centralized web resource 

summarizing the outcomes of the project as well as an overall evaluation of the project to 

inform other such potential endeavors. Although the actual overall time of completion has 

exceeded preliminary expectations, the project is continuously yielding valuable information 

and will continue to be a landmark in health sciences librarianship research. 

REFERENCES 

1 Dalrymple PW, Bastille JD, Bradley J, Dee CR, Humphreys BL, Marshall JG, Weller AC, Webb RE. 
Using scientific evidence to improve information practice. Chicago, IL: Medical Library 

http://eventscribe.com/2015/MLA/TwitterPoster.asp?PosterID=38894
https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jchla/index.php/jchla/article/view/22906/17075


ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  15                                                                                

 

Association, 1995. [cited 10 March 2017]. 
<http://www.mlanet.org/p/do/sd/topic=574&sid=2948>.       

2 Anderson RK. Inaugural address. Proceedings, Ninety-seventh Annual Meeting Medical Library 
Association, Inc. Seattle, Washington May 24-28, 1997. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1998 
Jan;86(1):137-9. PubMed PMID: 16018060; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC226342. 

3 Eldredge J. Evidence-Based Librarianship; a commentary. Hypothesis. 1997 Fall; 11(3): 4-7. 

4 Eldredge JD. Evidence-based practice. In: Introduction to health sciences librarianship. Edited 
by Sandra Wood. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press, 2008: 245-69. 

5 Eldredge JD. Integrating research into practice. Journal of the Medical Library Association 
2016 Oct; 104 (4): 333-7. 

6 Medical Library Association. The research imperative: the research policy statement of the 
Medical Library Association. Appendix 4: Action Plan. Section One [Internet]. Chicago: Medical 
Library Association, 2007 [cited 10 March 2017]. 
<http://www.mlanet.org/p/do/sd/topic=574&sid=2947 >.   

7 Eldredge JD, Ascher MT, Holmes HN, Harris MR. The new Medical Library Association research 
agenda: final results from a three-phase Delphi study. J Med Libr Assoc. 2012 Jul;100(3):214-8. 
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.012. PubMed PMID:22879811; PubMed Central PMCID: 
PMC3411260 

8 Ascher MT, Eldredge JD, Holmes HN, Harris MR. The MLA Research Agenda: appraising the 
best available evidence. Proposed Guidelines to the MLA Research Section Executive 
Committee. Working paper. 2012 Nov 2. [unpublished]. [Cited 10 March 2017]. 
<http://repository.unm.edu/handle/1928/24634>.      

9 Ascher MT, Holmes HN, Eldredge JD. Addressing the MLA Research Agenda questions: where 
are we now? Poster. International Congress of Medical Librarianship/Medical Library 
Association Annual Meeting. Boston, MA. May 4-8, 2013. 

10 Holmes HN, Ascher MT, Eldredge JD. The MLA Research Agenda Systematic Review Project. 
Open Forum. Medical Library Association Annual Meeting. Austin, TX. May 17, 2015. 

11 Mulrow CD. Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994 Sep 3; 309(6954):597-9. PubMed 
PMID: 8086953; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2541393. 



ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  16                                                                                

 

12 Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ. 
1994 Nov 12; 309(6964):1286-91. PubMed PMID: 7718048; PubMed Central PMCID: 
PMC2541778. 

13 Hunt DL, McKibbon KA. Locating and appraising systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997 
Apr 1; 126(7):532-8. PubMed PMID: 9092319 

14 Beverley CA, Booth A, Bath PA. The role of the information specialist in the systematic review 
process: a health information case study. Health Info Libr J. 2003 Jun; 20(2):65-74. PubMed 
PMID: 12786905. 

15 Harris MR. The librarian's roles in the systematic review process: a case study. J Med Libr 
Assoc. 2005 Jan; 93(1):81-7. PubMed PMID: 15685279; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC545126. 

16 Institute of Medicine.  Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews.  
Washington, DC; National Academies Press; 2011. 

17 Foster MJ.  An overview of the role of librarians in systematic review: from expert searcher to 
project manager. J Eur Assoc Health Inf Libr. 2015;11(3):3-7. 

18 Metzendorf MI. Why medical information specialists should routinely form part of teams 
producing high quality systematic review: a Cochrane perspective. J Eur Assoc Health Inf Libr 
2016; 12 (4): 6-9.  

19 Koufogiannakis D. LIS systematic reviews [Internet]. Jan 23 2012. [Cited 17 March 2017]. 
<http://lis-systematic-reviews.wikispaces.com/Welcome >.       

20 Eldredge J, Ascher M, Holmes HN. MLA Research Agenda Systematic Review Project Team 
Updates Presentation. Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association. 2015 May 17. Austin, 
TX. 

21 Perrier L, Farrell A, Ayala AP, Lightfoot D, Kenny T, Aaronson E, Allee N, Brigham T, Connor E, 
Constantinescu T, Muellenbach J, Epstein HA, Weiss A. Effects of librarian-provided services in 
healthcare settings: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(6):1118-24. 
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4215058/>. 

22 Madden A, Collins P, McGowan S, Stevenson P, Castelli D, Hyde L, DeSanto K, O'Brien N, 
Purdon M, Delgado D. 2016. Demonstrating the financial impact of clinical libraries: a 
systematic review. Health Info Lib J. 2016; 33(3):172-189. 
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hir.12151/abstract>. 



ORIGINAL RESEARCH 

Marie T. Ascher 

Jonathan D. Eldredge 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 1, Spring/Summer 2017                                                                  17                                                                                

 

23 Swanberg SM, Dennison CC, Farrell A, Machel V, Marton C, O'Brien KK, Pannabecker V, Thuna 
M, Holyoke AN. Instructional methods used by health sciences librarians to teach evidence-
based practice (EBP): a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jul; 104(3): 197–208. 
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4915637/>. 

---


