 |
 |
At NC State University Libraries we are looking at how to better support systematic reviews. I want share some of what we're doing especially around bulk ILL requests and then ask if anyone else has experience supporting systematic reviews. We have some faculty using Covidence to manage systematic reviews. A time consuming part to the current workflow is getting full text articles for everything. Endnote can be configured with Libraries services to get PDFs for many works, but not all. The references missing full text get routed through ILL for delivery and then uploaded to the systematic review application Covidence, but this can often be very many publications and a manual process. In order to scale our services we've developed a prototype application which can take the references lacking full text and route them through ILLiad. Once they're delivered to ILLiad the application then collects the PDFs and packages them in such a way that they more easily import into Covidence matching the correct reference there. We're calling this prototype Bulk ILL, Y'all (or BILLY). While the initial use case is supporting systematic reviews, we imagine there might be other use cases for making ILL requests in bulk and delivering them appropriately as a group. Does your library do similar bulk ILL processes? What are the use cases you have? Is your library supporting systematic reviews? What type of support are you offering? Who is involved with retrieving full text articles? Have you automated aspects of the document process to make it less time-consuming? What other automation have you added into your systematic review support? Does your library offer researchers access to systematic review screening and data extraction software via a university license? If so, what systematic review tool or tools does your library support during the screening and data extraction phase of systematic reviews? Thank you for anything that you can share on these topics. Best, Jason