Meta-Research, or research about research, has existing for many years, but only recently has it started to be identified more formally. Gregory Laynor, co-founder of the Meta-Research Collaborative, is in the forefront of this area of information science.
In this interview for the ATG Podcast, Laynor traces his journey from studying English poetry to becoming a systematic medical review librarian at NYU. He explores the importance of systematic reviews in healthcare, the role of libraries in interpreting academic content, and the intersection of AI literacy with systematic reviews. Layner identifies where in the discovery process the user and the library staff fit in:
the general impulse is to say that everybody should be involved in making their healthcare decisions is great, but not all of us have medical expertise. But being able to use some of the librarian skill set, like the reference interview, or clarifying a question, being able to evaluate different information sources, that cultivating that knowledge and making that broadly accessible, whether through systematic reviews or through the kinds of education that librarians can be involved in, including educating future healthcare providers?
In light of the challenges posed by AI in the systematic review process, there is a need for better training for future researchers. This is where the Meta-Research Collaborative, comes in: an initiative aimed at improving research practices, and addressing challenges in the research system. Laynor identifies a new role for libraries in the age of genAI:
I think that the interpretation and evaluation of publications, of research, could become even more important for libraries than being the repository of information, because of large language models, Being able to validate what’s reliable, [or] creating tools to validate information, or to provide library patrons information to evaluate what they’re looking at, creating those frameworks, tools, systems, is really going to be the role.
Laynor is specific about the active role for libraries in carrying out reviews:
How were participants in the clinical trial recruited? What were the demographics? How well was the clinical trial designed in terms of blinding of researchers and participants and clinicians, and that there could be sort of maybe signals on anything that you’re viewing that would help inform what are you looking at? And I think that creating those frameworks, tools, systems, is really going to be the role.
This active role could extend to making new discoveries from the literature – what are known as “sleeping-beauty findings”. Hear more about sleeping beauties and the links between Stein and systematic reviews in the full interview.
Leave a Reply