Health Sciences Interest Group

  • Private Community
 View Only
last person joined: 5 days ago 

Charge: An opportunity for academic librarians with health sciences responsibilities to have a place in ACRL to network, share information, ask questions, and work on special projects relevant to the academic health sciences.
Community members can post as a new Discussion or email ALA-acrlhsig@ConnectedCommunity.org
Before you post: please note job postings are prohibited on ALA Connect. Please see the Code of Conduct for more information.

  • 1.  Not a Literature Review Not a Systematic Review

    Posted May 02, 2022 08:48 PM
    Hi All,

    I had a consultation with a PhD student this afternoon who is looking for some assistance publishing a review in the field of public health, specifically the role of lipids in diabetes. 

    They posed an interesting question - they've done the review by themself, so it's not a systematic review, but it's a fairly formal literature review (they have between 60-70 sources). They don't want the manuscript to get rejected because it was described inaccurately and wanted to know if there is a term for something that's in between? I had never heard of one, but thought I would pose the question to the community. 

    Thanks!

    All the best,

    Shelby C. 
    Science Librarian


  • 2.  RE: Not a Literature Review Not a Systematic Review

    Posted May 04, 2022 10:46 AM
    This LIbGuide is from Texas A&M Libraries and might provide some help in determining what to call it, as it lists different types of reviews: https://tamu.libguides.com/c.php?g=1204115&p=8827428. Here is a page that shows a decision tree on figuring out which review is right for you: https://tamu.libguides.com/c.php?g=1204115&p=8807505

    Hope this helps the PhD student.

    Best, 
    Lynn 

    Lynn Bostwick
    Reference & Instruction Librarian
    Texas State University - Round Rock Campus



    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Not a Literature Review Not a Systematic Review

    Posted May 04, 2022 12:15 PM
    One option that might be suitable is called a "systematized review". According to Grant and Booth (2009), it has some elements of a systematic review but doesn't have the resources (dual screening) or steps of a full systematic review. That being said, if the methodology wasn't done in a structured way, or there is no methodology at all, then perhaps it should remain a narrative literature review, which isn't a bad thing either. 

    This article is a great read about the value of a traditional review: https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12931

    Hope that helps.

    Cheers,
    Zahra
    ---

    Zahra Premji, PhD MLIS

    Health Research Librarian, University of Victoria Libraries



    ------------------------------
    Zahra Premji
    Health Research Librarian
    University of Victoria Libraries
    She/Her/Hers
    ------------------------------

    Original Message