Changing minds and methods: Providing health science faculty with optional systematic reviews assignments

Background Health science librarians frequently engage in discussions about the proper assignment of systematic reviews for graduate students. Such reviews are often assigned as a way to build the research skills students will need in a clinical environment and provide them with a publishable deliverable. In the assignment of these reviews, it has become apparent that health science faculty are often not familiar with the standardized methodologies required. Incorrect methodologies can contribute to research waste and produce evidence that cannot be applied for its intended purpose. Case presentation Health science librarians at an R1 institution decided to address the systematic review knowledge gap in a continuing education webinar for health science faculty and graduate students. The webinar provided guidance on evidence synthesis methodologies along with an introduction to optional modified research assignments. The modified assignments were developed by drawing from cognitive load theory and the concept of chunking. The librarians divided the systematic review process into manageable assignments, each with specific learning objectives and grading criteria. Pre- and post-webinar surveys were conducted to gauge any changes in faculty knowledge, skills, or abilities resulting from the presentation. Conclusions The study participants included 6 faculty and a graduate student. Survey results showed that participants had an improved understanding of and placed increased importance on systematic review guidelines, with a positive shift in views on the assignment of systematic reviews. The authors of this study plan to further evaluate the impact of this webinar and to assess its effectiveness in changing health science research assignments.