**Component 1 (Gathering...)** provides several methods to investigate your community's (campus, institution, etc.) ES interest in addition to your library's interest and resources ES methodology. The methods provided are not the only options of evidence gathering, but rather a foundation to begin your investigation and represent the course of action the authors completed in their own ES investigation. Component 1 includes considerations for library time, money, tools, and expertise to support ES projects. Community Interest Evidence --------------------------- 1. Reference and consultations: Evaluated the number of reference questions and consultations about ES projects between January 2020 and January 2024. Terms searched: systematic review; scoping; Covidence; prospero Reference and/or consultations to be at least 3% of the total to move into Medium level (author’s perspective) 2. ES LibGuide usage: Tracked the usage trends of their library’s Evidence Synthesis LibGuide since it was established in 2019. (https://libguides.library.ohio.edu/SR) Authors found upward trend of views with an average of 101 views/month 3. Department Environmental scan survey: Used the results from their departmental environmental scan survey sent out to university faculty, staff, and students regarding their research needs. Questions 6 and 7 below are specifically related to ES support: Supporting research methodology and data analysis. (adequate, inadequate, not applicable). If the question was ranked “inadequate” the survey participant was asked to rank the subcategories from highest to lowest need. Specific research analysis software support (Nvivo, Excel, SPSS, Taguette, etc.) Text analysis training and resources Text analysis research consultations Data visualization consultations Library data and research resources (HathiTrust, ICPSR) Introduction to evidence synthesis, like systematic reviews Consultations or co-authorship on evidence synthesis projects Results: 13% of respondents noted “supporting research methodology…” as inadequate. Of which rankings related to ES support was mid-range interest. 4. Institution’s ES publication output: Search 2-3 databases that range disciplines for “systematic review”; “meta-analysis”; “scoping review”; “rapid review” with author information limited to your institution. Are there any publications with these terms in the titles? What departments are they coming from? Search at least: PubMed and SCOPUS/Web of Science PubMed search: "review"[Publication Type] OR "review literature as topic"[MeSH Terms] OR "systematic review"[All Fields] OR "scoping review" AND "your INSTITUTION" Library & Resources Evidence ---------------------------- - ES project workload (would represent at medium level support, but also serves as time/resoure guidance for assessment) Finally, they used an ES project of which they were co-authors with psychology research faculty, as a case study. (minimum of 1 year project). During this case study, the presenters tracked the number of hours and type of work needed to successfully complete the project and to assess the reality of the workload. The case study included an investigation of relevant ES platforms and resources to address cost and usability that best meets researcher needs and funding restrictions. Time: Staff availability and amount of time worked on a full, co-authored project, for 37 weeks (not full length of project) two librarians dedicated roughly 5% of their weekly time on the co-authored, ES project. This included everything from preparation meetings, crafting and testing search strategies, troubleshooting technology issues, requesting interlibrary loans, and manuscript writing. *What took the most time?* - ~16 hours search strategy experimentation, peer-review, database/platform trouble-shooting, saving records to citation manager - ~15 hours of training/learning platforms (some was additional for comparison experiment) - ~8 hours communication/meetings with full team - ~8 hours correcting citations for final records - ~5 hours of full-text gathering *Tool/Expertise Developed and Explored:* - Citation manager expertise: Zotero (open access) vs. Endnote (cost) pros/cons - Project management ability and collaboration skills - Abstract tracking tool familiarity: SRDR+/abstrackR vs. Covidence (cost) pros/cons - Database/search strategist expertise - ES best practices knowledge/methodologist - Writing skills