Assessing journal author guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: findings from an institutional sample |
| |
Authors: | Johanna Goldberg Lindsay M Boyce Cline Soudant Kendra Godwin |
| |
Institution: | 1. , Research Informationist, Medical Library, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY;2. , Research Informationist, Medical Library, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY;3. , Research Informationist, Medical Library, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY;4. , Research Informationist, Medical Library, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY |
| |
Abstract: | Objectives:Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) are designed to be rigorous research methodologies that synthesize information and inform practice. An increase in their publication runs parallel to quality concerns and a movement toward standards to improve reporting and methodology. With the goal of informing the guidance librarians provide to SR/MA teams, this study assesses online journal author guidelines from an institutional sample to determine whether these author guidelines address SR/MA methodological quality.Methods:A Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate) search identified SRs/MAs published in 2014–2019 by authors affiliated with a single institution. The AMSTAR 2 checklist was used to develop an assessment tool of closed questions specific to measures for SR/MA methodological quality in author guidelines, with questions added about author guidelines in general. Multiple reviewers completed the assessment.Results:The author guidelines of 141 journals were evaluated. Less than 20% addressed at least one of the assessed measures specific to SR/MA methodological quality. There was wide variation in author guidelines between journals from the same publisher apart from the American Medical Association, which consistently offered in-depth author guidelines. Normalized Eigenfactor and Article Influence Scores did not indicate author guideline breadth.Conclusions:Most author guidelines in the institutional sample did not address SR/MA methodological quality. When consulting with teams embarking on SRs/MAs, librarians should not expect author guidelines to provide details about the requirements of the target journals. Librarians should advise teams to follow established SR/MA standards, contact journal staff, and review SRs/MAs previously published in the journal. |
| |
Keywords: | systematic review meta-analysis author instructions journal requirements research methodology publishing |
|
|