Presentation of the paper “The Systematic Review of Literature in LIS: An approach” Tránsito Ferreras-Fernández GRIAL Research Group, Library Services, University of Salamanca +34 923294500 ex.3472 transiff@usal.es Abstract This is the presentation of the paper entitled “The Systematic Review of Literature in LIS: An approach” in the New publishing and scientific communication ways: Electronic edition, digital educational resources Track of the TEEM 2016 International Conference held in Salamanca (Spain) in November 2-4, 2016. GRIAL research group [31-32] has a research line in Library and Information Science (LIS) based on the defense of open science [33-35], it means the defense of open access dissemination of research outcomes [36] (and other academic resources, such as open educational resources [37-38]) using both the gold route and the green route throughout the institutional repositories [39-41], which allow a knowledge management and reuse strategy [42-44]. Systematic reviews have become an important source of information and very popular in knowledge areas as health and allied sciences, but nevertheless, despite its indisputable benefits, they are yet infrequently used in Library and Information Science research. Systematic reviews are a type of scientific research that aims to integrate in an objective and systematic manner the results of empirical studies on a particular research problem in order to determine the state of the question in its field of study. In this paper, we provide a brief survey on the literature reviews in the social science area and we propose the adoption of the systematic review as a methodology for recovering, analyzing, evaluating and critical appraising the relevant literature in library and information science. The presented paper may be cited as: Ferreras-Fernández, T., Martín-Rodero, H., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Merlo-Vega, J. A. (2016). The Systematic Review of Literature in LIS: An approach. In F. J. García- Peñalvo (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’16) (Salamanca, Spain, November 2-4, 2016) (pp. 291-296). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/3012430.3012531 Link to the presentation http://es.slideshare.net/grialusal/the-systematic-review-of-literature-in-lis-an-approach Keywords Systematic reviews; Literature reviews; Library and Information Science; Social Sciences References [1] Campbell, S. A. and Menk, D. W. 2003. Editors’ Introduction. Review of Educational Research. 73, 2, 123–124. [2] Xu, J., Kang, Q., and Song, Z. 2015. The current state of systematic reviews in library and information studies. Library & Information Science Research. 37, 4, 296–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2015.11.003 [3] Ferreira González, I., Urrútia, G., and Alonso-Coello, P. 2011. Revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis: bases conceptuales e interpretación. Revista Española de Cardiología. 64, 8, 688– 696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2011.03.029 [4] Higgins, J. and Green, S. Eds. 2011. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention Version 5.1.0 [update March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available from http://www.handbook.cochrane.org [5] Rapple, C. 2011. The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload. Annual Reviews White Paper. [6] Erren, T. C., Cullen P., and Erren, M. 2009. How to surf today’s information tsunami: on the craft of effective reading. Medical Hypotheses. 73, 3, 278–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2009.05.002 [7] Hampton, S. E. and Parker, J. N. 2011. Collaboration and Productivity in Scientific Synthesis. BioScience. 61, 11, 900–910. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.11.9 [8] Ketcham, C. M. and Crawford, J. M. 2007. The impact of review articles. Laboratory Investigation. 87, 12, 1174–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/labinvest.3700688 [9] Maier, H.R. 2013. What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter? Environmental Modelling & Software. 43, 3–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.02.004 [10] Pautasso, M. 2013. Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Computational Biology. 9, 7. e1003149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 [11] Cooper, H.M. 1988. Organizing Knowledge Syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society. 1, 1, 104–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf03177550 [12] Templier, M. and Paré, G. 2015. A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 37,1,6. [13] Joseph, D., Ng, K.-Y., Koh, C., and Ang, S. 2007. Turnover of Information Technology Professionals: a Narrative Review, Meta-analytic Structural Equation Modeling, and Model Development. MIS Quarterly. 31, 3, 547–577. [14] Varey, R. J., Wood-Harper, T., and Wood, B. 2002. A theoretical review of management and information systems using a critical communications theory. Journal of Information Technology. 17, 4, 229–239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0268396022000017725 [15] Fichman, R. G. 1992. Information technology diffusion: A review of empirical research. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems (Dallas, Texas, December 13-16, 1992), 195–206. [16] Yang, H. and Tate, M. 2009. Where are we at with Cloud Computing?: A Descriptive Literature Review. In 20th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (Melbourne, Australia, December 02-03, 2009), 13. [17] Liu, Z., Min, Q., and Ji, S. 2008. A comprehensive review of research in IT adoption. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing (Dalian, China, October 12-14, 2008), 1–5. [18] Williams, M. D., Dwivedi, Y. K., Lal, B., and Schwarz, A. 2009. Contemporary trends and issues in IT adoption and diffusion research. Journal of Information Technology. 24, 1, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jit.2008.30 [19] King, W. R. and He, J. 2006. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management. 43, 6, 740–755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003 [20] Martín Rodero, H. 2014. La búsqueda bibliográfica, pilar fundamental de la Medicina Basada en la Evidencia: evaluación multivariante en las enfermedades nutricionales y metabólicas. Doctoral Thesis. Elche, Universidad Miguel Hernández. [21] Petticrew, M. and Roberts, H. 2006. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. Blackwell, Oxford. [22] Grant, M. J. and Booth, A. 2009. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 26, 2, 91–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x [23] Sáenz, A. 2001. Leer e interpretar una revisión sistemática. Bol Pediatr. 41, 177, 215–21. [24] Brettle, A. 2003. Information skills training: a systematic review of the literature*. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 20, s1, 3–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2532.20.s1.3.x [25] Kitchenham, B. and Charters, S. 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. EBSE Technical Report. Keele University. [26] Kitchenham, B. and Chartes, S. 2009. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology. 51, 1, 7–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009 [27] Koufogiannakis, D. and Crumley, E. 2006. Research in librarianship: issues to consider. Library Hi Tech. 24, 3, 324–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692109 [28] Wanden-Berghe, C. and Sanz-Valero, J. 2014. Revisiones sistemáticas sobre las funciones de los ácidos grasos poliinsaturados omega-3 en la salud y la enfermedad. In Libro Blanco de los Omega- 3 (eBook online), Gil Hernández A., Serra Majem L. Panamericana, Barcelona, 73–79. [29] Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., and the PRISMA Group. 2009. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 6,7, e1000097. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 [30] Ferreras-Fernández, T., Martín-Rodero, H., García-Peñalvo, F.J., and Merlo-Vega, J.A., 2016. The Systematic Review of Literature in LIS: An approach. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’16) (Salamanca, Spain, November 2-4, 2016), F.J. García-Peñalvo Ed. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 291-296. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3012430.3012531. [31] García-Peñalvo, F.J., Rodríguez-Conde, M.J., Seoane-Pardo, A.M., Conde-González, M.Á., Zangrando, V., and García-Holgado, A., 2012. GRIAL (GRupo de investigación en InterAcción y eLearning), USAL. IE Comunicaciones. Revista Iberoamericana de Informática Educativa, 15, 85-94. [32] García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2016. Presentation of the GRIAL research group and its main research lines and projects on March 2016. GRIAL Research Group, http://hdl.handle.net/10366/127737. [33] García-Peñalvo, F.J., García De Figuerola, C., and Merlo-Vega, J.A., 2010. Open knowledge: Challenges and facts. Online Information Review 34, 4, 520-539. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521011072963. [34] Bartling, S. and Friesike, S., 2014. Opening Science. The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing Springer International Publishing, Heidelberg. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8. [35] Crouzier, T., 2015. Science Ecosystem 2.0: how will change occur? Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. [36] Ferreras-Fernández, T., Merlo-Vega, J.A., and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2013. Science 2.0 supported by Open Access Repositories and Open Linked Data. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’13) (Salamanca, Spain, November 14-15, 2013), F.J. García-Peñalvo Ed. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 331-332. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2536536.2536586. [37] Ramírez Montoya, M.S. and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2015. Movimiento Educativo Abierto. Virtualis 6, 12, 1-13. [38] Morales, E.M., Gómez-Aguilar, D., and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2008. HEODAR: Herramienta para la Evaluación de Objetos Didácticos de Aprendizaje Reutilizables. In Actas del X Simposio Internacional de Informática Educativa - SIIE’08 J.Á. Velázquez-Iturbide, F.J. García-Peñalvo and A.B. Gil Eds. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, España. [39] García-Peñalvo, F.J., Merlo-Vega, J.A., Ferreras-Fernández, T., Casaus-Peña, A., Albás-Aso, L., and Atienza-Díaz, M.L., 2010. Qualified Dublin Core Metadata Best Practices for GREDOS. Journal of Library Metadata 10, 1, 13-36. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19386380903546976. [40] Morales Morgado, E.M., Campos Ortuño, R.A., Yang, L.L., and Ferreras-Fernández, T., 2014. Adaptation of Descriptive Metadata for Managing Educational Resources in the GREDOS Repository. International Journal of Knowledge Management 10, 4, 50-72. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijkm.2014100104. [41] Morales, E.M., Gil, A.B., and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2007. Arquitectura para la Recuperación de Objetos de Aprendizaje de Calidad en Repositorios Distribuidos. In Actas del 5º Taller en Sistemas Hipermedia Colaborativos y Adaptativos, SHCA 2007, F. Gutiérrez Vela and P. Paderewski Rodriguez Eds., Zaragoza, España, 31-38. [42] Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Sein-Echaluce, M.L., and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2014. Knowledge Spirals in Higher Education Teaching Innovation. International Journal of Knowledge Management 10, 4, 16-37. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijkm.2014100102. [43] Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Sein-Echaluce, M.L., and García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2015. Epistemological and ontological spirals: From individual experience in educational innovation to the organisational knowledge in the university sector. Program: Electronic library and information systems 49, 3, 266-288. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/PROG-06-2014-0033. [44] García-Peñalvo, F.J., 2000. Modelo de Reutilización Soportado por Estructuras Complejas de Reutilización Denominadas Mecanos. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain.