Introduction
We are seeing an increase in undergraduate health sciences students being advised by their supervisors to publish evidence synthesis papers to enhance their medical school applications. This presents many challenges for both the students and the health sciences librarian. As we explored how best to support these students, we started by asking how often students are listed as authors in published review articles. Primary research questions include: How many review articles have Laurier affiliated authors published? How many included student authors? How do evidence syntheses vary by department?

Methods
Six databases covering multiple disciplines were searched for titles including the word review and our institutional affiliation (n=909). Being a smaller institution, this broad scope was possible and was designed to enable analysis of disciplinary differences. Covidence was used to remove duplicates (n= 478) and support the 2-step screening process. Data extraction (n= 147) included bibliographic information, department, student status, librarian involvement, type of review, type of publication, and methodology.

Results
Data analysis is ongoing at the time of submission, but there are some preliminary results. The most prolific departments were psychology (18%), business (17%), social work (15%) and health sciences (13%). Students contributed to 35% of the articles. The majority were doctoral students (55%) but 23% were undergraduates, mainly health sciences. Students most often wrote scoping reviews (31%). Librarians were acknowledged in 28% of the publications.

Discussion
Understanding undergraduate involvement in evidence syntheses will enable us to develop appropriate policies and resources for sustainable and ethical support.

Introduction
The explosive growth of evidence synthesis projects has prompted many institutions to develop or refine their services and staffing models. This presents an additional challenge for institutions without medical schools which often lack trained librarians and resources dedicated to this service and which are seeing increased demand from many disciplines outside health sciences. This presentation will highlight approaches used by two medium-sized universities – one with liaison librarians, another with functional teams - to assess needs and develop sustainable models for supporting evidence synthesis research across diverse non-clinical disciplines. As well, the presenters will share preliminary results from a survey documenting experiences and service models at other generalist institutions.

Methods
Following research ethics clearance, a short survey will be distributed on relevant listservs (e.g. KSIG, CAPAL) to collect information from non-health-sciences libraries about their models for supporting evidence synthesis research.

Results
The presentation will report on expected outcomes including insights into how libraries are building structures and processes to support the growing demand for evidence synthesis research outside the traditional base of clinical health sciences.

Discussion
Sharing the experiences of a diverse range of institutions will provide us all with insights and further questions to consider as we work to develop effective, sustainable and equitable evidence synthesis supports and services.