Introduction
Information specialists who collaborate on knowledge synthesis (KS) projects invest tremendous time and intellectual labour on reviews. Despite their critical role in ensuring review quality, the outcomes of their contributions—such as successful publication—remain unclear. Consequently, there is a need to analyze longitudinal data on the outcomes of collaborations such as the rate of publication success versus the number of unfinished reviews. Our study aims to understand what happens after the intense work of evidence retrieval has been completed.
Methods
Between 2013 and 2023, information specialists from a multi-site health network collaborated with research teams on 596 KS projects. In 2024, the library team collected and analyzed KS project data from its data analytics platform, LibInsight (Springshare), with the aim of detecting trends, measuring the impact of interventions to reduce research waste, and of making recommendations for future practice. This process involved identifying the numbers of dropped projects and successful publications, of librarian co-authorships or acknowledgements, the types of review methodologies used, and more.
Results
Preliminary findings suggest a substantial number of KS collaborations with information specialists did not result in published manuscripts. The results indicate implementation of a formal policy and application process may have reduced incomplete projects. This study examined both completed and incomplete projects to identify factors that led to publication.
Discussion
This study examines the investment by information specialists in KS projects and the characteristics of projects that result in publication. Findings provide insight for more effective collaboration with research teams.