Systematic reviews are a well-established method of research synthesis in medicine and the clinical sciences. Their use in other disciplines has been growing, especially in areas that collaborate with the health sciences. At the authors’ institution, requests for help with systematic reviews have become more frequent in recent years across several non-health-science fields. In this paper, the authors explore the use of systematic reviews in the engineering literature, and the need for engineering librarians to be familiar with the conventions of this methodology. This study seeks to answer three questions: 1) are systematic reviews being published in the engineering literature more frequently? 2) is this methodology more prevalent in certain engineering disciplines than in others? and 3) do systematic reviews see greater use than other types of papers? First, the share of papers using this methodology is examined to confirm the authors’ impression that the use of this methodology has increased beyond the rate of increase in publications overall. Next, bibliographic records from several abstracting and indexing databases are analyzed to identify the subject areas within engineering in which research synthesis techniques are most prevalent. Citation counts are also analyzed to determine whether systematic reviews are more likely to be used than other papers in the same subject areas, as has been shown to occur in some non-engineering disciplines. Finally, options for librarians to support this type of research synthesis are discussed, including building familiarity with tools such as Rayyan and Covidence, offering expert search guidance through instruction and consultation, and co-authorship.
The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on
June 22, 2020, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 26, 2021
Are you a researcher? Would you like to cite this paper?
Visit the ASEE document repository at
for more tools and easy citations.