Medlibs Miscellany
Medlibs Miscellany
MM.14: Research Rampage
0:00
Current time: 0:00 / Total time: -1:01:44
-1:01:44

MM.14: Research Rampage

In which Carrie and Tracy are joined by special guest, Zahra Premji.

NOTE: Apologies for the repost. We discovered a problem with our RSS feed. Hopefully this will fix things. -Tracy

0:00
-1:01:44

In this episode, Carrie and Tracy are joined by Zahra Premji, otherwise known as @ZapTheLibrarian if you are a part of the #medlibs community X, The Platform Formerly Known as Twitter.

Hear about Zahra’s path to medical librarianship and supporting evidence synthesis. She loved research so much, she just didn’t know when to stop — and as it turned out, she is really good at it!

She’s now leading the Canadian Evidence Synthesis Institute, which is based on the Institute of Museum and Library Services-funded Evidence Synthesis Institute at the University of Minnesota.

Picture of a crab

Zahra notes that she really enjoys the process of searching and the thrill of the chase of finding relevant articles. She’s also not remotely shy about her preference for the Ovid platform. (EBSCO, if you’re reading, we’re sorry!)

What else? Oh yeah, “searching is addictive,” she says.

Still, there are challenges to supporting evidence synthesis. Don’t look at our searches from three years (or three weeks) ago, because we’re constantly learning and trying to stay current. Also, we need time. It’s important to sit with a topic to come up with a good search, and having to rush means there are going to be mistakes.

Zahra and Tracy discuss different methods of doing a seed paper analysis. Zahra (and her co-contributor, Alix Hayden) developed a template, a version of which is posted on OSF. Carrie, on the other hand, is a PubReminer fan. And don’t discount some of the featured tools in the SR Accelerator suite.

She won’t toot her horn, so Carrie does it for her: Zahra’s a co-author on this recent paper published in Research Synthesis Methods. Are those search strategies really “available upon request”? Apparently, not always. Take a look at the amazing and crabby poster that preceded the published article.

Picture of PDF The literature search underpins data collection for all systematic reviews (SRs). The SR reporting guideline PRISMA, and its extensions, aim to facilitate research transparency and reproducibility, and ultimately improve the quality of research, by instructing authors to provide specific research materials and data upon publication of the manuscript. Search strategies are one item of data that are explicitly included in PRISMA and the critical appraisal tool AMSTAR2. Yet some authors use search availability statements implying that the search strategies are available upon request instead of providing strategies up front. We sought out reviews with search availability statements, characterized them, and requested the search strategies from authors via email. Over half of the included reviews cited PRISMA but less than a third included any search strategies. After requesting the strategies via email as instructed, we received replies from 46% of authors, and eventually received at least one search strategy from 36% of authors. Requesting search strategies via email has a low chance of success. Ask and you might receive-but you probably will not. SRs that do not make search strategies available are low quality at best according to AMSTAR2; Journal editors can and should enforce the requirement for authors to include their search strategies alongside their SR manuscripts.
Neilson, C. J., & Premji, Z. (2023). A study of search strategy availability statements and sharing practices for systematic reviews: Ask and you might receive. Research Synthesis Methods, 10.1002/jrsm.1696. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1696

Zahra remembered that Carrie recently collaborated with Melissa Rethlefsen on a paper about reproducibility (Melissa recently offered a webinar on it here).

Rethlefsen, M. L., Brigham, T. J., Price, C., Moher, D., Bouter, L. M., Kirkham, J. J., Schroter, S., & Zeegers, M. P. (2023). Systematic review search strategies are poorly reported and not reproducible: a cross-sectional metaresearch study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.111229

We wrap up with a shout-out to the Canadian Health Libraries Association and its sometimes-overlap with MLA.

We want to thank Zahra for being a wonderfully engaging guest, and thank all of our listeners for your continued listening support of Medlibs Miscellany.

Thanks for reading Medlibs Miscellany! Subscribe for free to receive new posts.

Discussion about this podcast

Medlibs Miscellany
Medlibs Miscellany
We are medical librarians talking about medical library things. We can be silly or serious, but always curious.