Health sciences librarians' engagement in open science: a scoping review.
Objectives: To identify the engagement of health sciences librarians (HSLs) in open science (OS) through the delivery of library services, support, and programs for researchers. Methods: We performed a scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Joanna Briggs' Manual for Scoping Rev...
| Publicado en: | Journal of the Medical Library Association Vol. 109; no. 4; pp. 540 - 561 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
University of Pittsburgh, University Library System
Oct2021
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=153765041&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 153765041 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 15365050 PI8 jtl: Journal of the Medical Library Association issn: 15365050 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Oct2021 vid: 109 iid: 4 pid: 60406 pub: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System place: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 153765041 153765041 153765041 10.5195/jmla.2021.1256 153765041 ppf: 540 ppct: 21 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Health sciences librarians' engagement in open science: a scoping review. aug: au: Giustini, Dean Read, Kevin B. Deardorff, Ariel Federer, Lisa Rethlefsen, Melissa L. affil: University of British Columbia, Biomedical Branch Library, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada sug: subj: Open Access Publishing Research Personnel Collaboration Library Services Health Sciences Librarians Professional Role Human Scoping Review Medline Embase CINAHL Database Serial Publications Citation Analysis Thematic Analysis Descriptive Statistics Information Resources Social Justice ab: Objectives: To identify the engagement of health sciences librarians (HSLs) in open science (OS) through the delivery of library services, support, and programs for researchers. Methods: We performed a scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Joanna Briggs' Manual for Scoping Reviews. Our search methods consisted of searching five bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LISTA, and Web of Science Core Collection), reference harvesting, and targeted website and journal searching. To determine study eligibility, we applied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria and reached consensus when there was disagreement. We extracted data in duplicate and performed qualitative analysis to map key themes. Results: We included fifty-four studies. Research methods included descriptive or narrative approaches (76%); surveys, questionnaires, and interviews (15%); or mixed methods (9%). We labeled studies with one or more of FOSTER's six OS themes: open access (54%), open data (43%), open science (24%), open education (6%), open source (6%), and citizen science (6%). Key drivers in OS were scientific integrity and transparency, openness as a guiding principle in research, and funder mandates making research publicly accessible. Conclusions: HSLs play key roles in advancing OS worldwide. Formal studies are needed to assess the impact of HSLs' engagement in OS. HSLs should promote adoption of OS within their research communities and develop strategic plans aligned with institutional partners. HSLs can promote OS by adopting more rigorous and transparent research practices of their own. Future research should examine HSLs' engagement in OS through social justice and equity perspectives. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|