ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2026
Structure and elements of library evidence synthesis services: a content analysis of publicly available information.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Through a content analysis of public websites, this paper provides a centralized and summarized picture of evidence synthesis (ES) service characteristics at academic libraries and medical schools and centers in the United States in the mid-2020s. Methods: Our team identified 116 institutions classified in the 2021 Carnegie Classification as R1, R2, or Medical Schools and Centers that had an ES service. These services were coded for service characteristics. Using frequency and comparison tables, we answered the following research questions: What are the common structures and characteristics of ES services, within and independent of Carnegie Classification of Research Activity? Is there any relationship between Carnegie Classification of Research Activity and Size & Setting and characteristics of ES services? Results: We found that services often used tiers to delineate between services offered, with higher tiers requiring more responsibilities from the library or information professional. Some universities and medical schools limit librarian involvement with ES projects based on user role (student, faculty, researcher, etc.) or user affiliation with a college or department. Librarian acknowledgment or authorship are common in return for engagement in ES projects. Fees and Memoranda of Understanding were uncommon but do exist at some institutions. Conclusion: Librarians seeking to create or update their ES service can benefit from this 'data snapshot,& as it will allow them to see the service elements under consideration by other institutions and offer ideas for their own services. Overall, we found that there were more similarities than differences between basic ES service structures (e.g. tier amounts/categories, presence of fees, etc.), independent of classification type or size setting. We recommend that librarians utilize this paper and the associated data in order to identify which institutional elements are important in their context for ideas in improving their ES service.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.