SWiRL-SR
​Standards for Working with Research
​Librarians-on Systematic Reviews

SWiRL-SR. Roth, Stephanie. (2025). Systematic Review Librarian. https://systematicreviewlibrarian.com/swirl-sr/​

When sharing this work, you may use the citation:

Author: Stephanie C. Roth, MLIS (AHIP-D)

Standards for Working with Research Librarians- on Systematic Reviews

SWiRL-SR (2025)

SWiRL-SR Statement:

Research librarians and/or information specialists, from here on out and for this work, will be referred to as librarians. Librarians may support researchers and participate in creating comprehensive literature searches for systematic reviews (evidence syntheses). Despite their knowledge and expertise in this area, how they work with teams on these detailed projects is not understood by all. This standard was developed in response to these growing complexities of co-authorship and misunderstandings that often arise, with sometimes no clear description and a general lack of understanding of the librarian’s role on teams, such as: what constitutes librarian co-authorship, what are the librarians’ individual and/or professional values around research integrity and quality. Librarians are not driven to publish from external pressures or validation. The rapid pace of academic publishing is in contrast to their motivation to help others do their best work. As a profession known for the responsibility and reliability of information, librarians need to be assured that the work they are co-authoring is reliable and meets the current standards for publishing. As more librarians’ (and information specialists) support systematic reviews/evidence syntheses, many libraries or institutions have created co-author agreements, Memorandums of Understanding, other policies, and/or Terms of Service documents (often requiring signatures of both the librarian and the principal investigator), to help protect their time and their scholarship, to avoid burnout, and to have their expertise or contributions recognized and respected.

While each library may have a formal or informal agreement with teams, SWiRL-SR, is not a replacement; it can be used as a supplement to take these agreements one step further to create a universal language for how to work with your librarian when they are co-authored on a systematic review.

Current agreements relate primarily to what researchers and librarians (information specialists) will do, but very few address the protection or control of their scholarship and/or how they are treated or respected on the team. While there is a benefit to include librarians as co-authors for systematic reviews, there’s very little to address what a respectful working relationship looks like that positions the librarian as an integral team member for systematic reviews. This is the purpose of SWiRL-SR, to fill this gap.

In systematic reviews, we see the line, “worked with a librarian or information specialist”; this has become mandatory for anyone publishing their systematic review, due to the National Academies (Science, Engineering, Medicine), Standards for Systematic Reviews (2011). However, this requirement can be misconstrued or used improperly when there are no clear parameters around how they work with a librarian. When this partnership is true and the librarian is valued, respected, and treated like an equal team member, the quality and rigor of the review are much higher.

When teams adopt and become familiar with SWiRL-SR, they not only choose to commit to caring about the how, but also the person behind the search; here they will find a partner in systematic reviews; this investment is the best investment for a systematic review team. It’s not the tool that makes the review, it’s the people and the ability to create a team where all can thrive and succeed.

The SWiRL-SR Checklist includes the following categories. These categories were identified by reviewing 31 Memorandums of Understanding or co-author agreements currently used by systematic review librarians in all settings (hospital, medical, non-medical, university, cancer centers) and types (fee-based or free); and from my own knowledge of supporting and working with researchers in a variety of settings (clinical, medical academic/university, hospital, cancer center) Many thanks to the 31 libraries/institutions who contributed to Phase 1 of this project and made this project possible. Contributing to this project is not an endorsement of the project or the contents of this project, website, or future iterations.

Stephanie Roth is the copyright owner of this website. Content cannot be resold, shared or reproduced without permission of the copyright owner.