Article type
Abstract
Background: The benefits of librarian or information specialist involvement in evidence synthesis projects are well documented. Organizations like Cochrane and Campbell advise review authors to work with a librarian. While some librarians are trained on how to conduct comprehensive and reproducible literature searches in accordance with guidelines, additional skills and capacity building are needed.
Objectives: The Evidence Synthesis Institute (ESI) aims to build capacity for high-quality evidence syntheses by training librarians to support researchers in these methods, to fill a gap in librarian training, and to disseminate open training materials.
Methods: A group of evidence synthesis librarians from a range of disciplinary backgrounds worked with an instructional designer to develop a virtual training for librarians supporting evidence synthesis. Institutes were held biannually with funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Participant applications were ranked according to a rubric that assessed urgency of need for training, existing knowledge gap, and potential impact. Participants admitted to each institute were given pre- and post-tests to rank self-efficacy in evidence synthesis skills. Additionally, participants provided feedback on the content and format of the training. Instructors used this feedback in an iterative design process to modify materials after each Institute. All course slides and materials were made openly available. Materials were adapted to create an open online course.
Results: From 2020 to 2024, there were 7 institutes and 3 institution-specific group institutes reaching ~400 librarians. There was high demand for ESI training with >100 applicants for each 50-person cohort. Two groups from outside the US—Canadian Association of Research Libraries and Information Training and Outreach Centre for Africa—used ESI materials and structure to host their own institutes. Assessments have shown statistical significance in reported self-efficacy to carry out and provide guidance on evidence synthesis methods across all cohorts.
Conclusions: ESI training is still in demand. More funding for skill and capacity building is needed to sustain this training. Capacity building efforts will continue to improve the reproducibility of search methods and facilitate an adequate peer reviewer pool for evaluating information retrieval methods/reporting.
Objectives: The Evidence Synthesis Institute (ESI) aims to build capacity for high-quality evidence syntheses by training librarians to support researchers in these methods, to fill a gap in librarian training, and to disseminate open training materials.
Methods: A group of evidence synthesis librarians from a range of disciplinary backgrounds worked with an instructional designer to develop a virtual training for librarians supporting evidence synthesis. Institutes were held biannually with funding from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Participant applications were ranked according to a rubric that assessed urgency of need for training, existing knowledge gap, and potential impact. Participants admitted to each institute were given pre- and post-tests to rank self-efficacy in evidence synthesis skills. Additionally, participants provided feedback on the content and format of the training. Instructors used this feedback in an iterative design process to modify materials after each Institute. All course slides and materials were made openly available. Materials were adapted to create an open online course.
Results: From 2020 to 2024, there were 7 institutes and 3 institution-specific group institutes reaching ~400 librarians. There was high demand for ESI training with >100 applicants for each 50-person cohort. Two groups from outside the US—Canadian Association of Research Libraries and Information Training and Outreach Centre for Africa—used ESI materials and structure to host their own institutes. Assessments have shown statistical significance in reported self-efficacy to carry out and provide guidance on evidence synthesis methods across all cohorts.
Conclusions: ESI training is still in demand. More funding for skill and capacity building is needed to sustain this training. Capacity building efforts will continue to improve the reproducibility of search methods and facilitate an adequate peer reviewer pool for evaluating information retrieval methods/reporting.