Regardless:

• Of your physical location – whether you are working from home or on-site at MSK,
• Of what device you are working on – whether you have been issued an MSK laptop or are working on your personal computer,
• If you have set-up VPN, PingID, and ez2Factor or not,
• If you are a clinician or non-clinician,
• If you have worked remotely from home before or not,
• If you need a journal article or book chapter on a specific topic,
  
  …your information and research needs can be met via the MSK Library’s homepage!

Note:  Not all MSK Library’s resources have been converted to electronic formats although our collection development policies favor electronic versions of resources (when available and not cost-prohibitive) – for both books and journals.

Paired with its super-efficient Document Delivery Service (which allows the library to take advantage of both the print and electronic collections of other libraries), the MSK Library is well-positioned to offer a comprehensive digital library experience for the entire MSK community.

Here’s what you need to do if you are NOT on the MSK campus and are NOT using VPN from offsite:

To gain access to the MSK Library’s electronic resources remotely, all you need to do is go to the MSK Library’s homepage at https://library.mskcc.org/ (you can even just Google “MSK Library” to reach it) and then click “Remote Access” located at the top right of your screen.

Enter the requested information and start using resources by launching them from the MSK Library website.

If you have any issues finding or accessing resources, please be sure to Ask Us.

The publication of systematic reviews has been on the rise over the last decade, a trend which has greatly supported evidence based practice. As with most things, however, too much of a good thing likely has a downside. In recent years, multiple authors have brought attention to the fact that the “production of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses has reached epidemic proportions” and that their publication may be in need of some “realignment” – see, for example, this article by John Ioannidis:

Ioannidis JP. The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016 Sep;94(3):485-514. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12210. PMID: 27620683; PMCID: PMC5020151. 

One consequence of all of this has been that many journal publishers are making their manuscript submission requirements and minimum standards for consideration of systematic reviews and meta-analyses a bit more stringent. Below are some examples of requirements authors may come across in a journal’s authors’ instructions for manuscript submission.

It’s now pretty common for journals to not only require the inclusion of a PRISMA Flow diagram, but also the submission of a completed PRISMA checklist.

• For example, from JAMA Oncology’s instructions for authors:
  
  

  “A PRISMA-style flow diagram showing this information should also be included as an online-only supplement. In addition, a completed PRISMA checklist should be submitted for the items completed that apply to systematic reviews (the checklist items that apply to meta-analyses do not need to be completed for systematic reviews without meta-analysis). The checklist will be used during review but will not be published.”

Item no. 5 on the PRISMA checklist asks for information about the existence of a protocol and its registration. Some journals, particularly ones based in Europe, have now actually made prospective registration of the systematic review on PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews, or a similar database, compulsory for acceptance and publication (whereas it generally used to be suggested but optional for most journals).

• From the British Journal of Psychiatry’s instructions for authors:
  
  

  “We require authors to register the protocol for systematic reviews on an accessible, searchable site such as PROSPERO and include the registration number in the abstract. If the review has not been registered, we are unable to consider your submission.”

Even more strict, there are publishers that have started being explicit about the minimum number of papers that should be included in the submitted synthesis in order for them to give it their attention and consideration.

• From the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery‘s instructions for authors:
  
  

  “Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses: Systematic reviews or meta-analyses that include ≤10 papers will be rejected without review. Manuscripts that review more than 10 papers but have uncertain conclusions (e.g., fatal heterogeneity of data, conclusions state that data are limited and better studies need to be done) will likely be rejected.”

The take-away: Knowing these journal-specific requirements in advance is useful for planning the systematic review or meta-analysis project. Researchers should consider target journal candidates and review their instructions for authors early on in the process.

For more information, be sure to check out the MSK Library’s Systematic Review Service LibGuide or Ask Us.

When you are updating a CV, it’s generally a good idea to search in more than one bibliographic database, especially if your goal is to capture all of an author’s publications, regardless of format (journal articles, book chapters, meeting abstracts, etc). Depending on the discipline, it may be likely that authors are publishing in journals that are not necessarily classified as “biomedical” and so may not qualify for indexing in a database like PubMed/MEDLINE.

To conduct a comprehensive search (ie. one that does not miss any works), it is advisable to start your search in PubMed (using multiple name variations if needed) but then to also search in two other multidisciplinary databases that the MSK Library subscribes to:

1) Scopus
2) Web of Science (WoS)

Both of these databases now offer an “Author Search” option that leads to a profile page for that author (where you can see their list of documents, as well as, links to documents that cite these publications). For example, see Dr. Craig B. Thompson’s Scopus profile. Another resource available to you is Synapse, the MSK Library’s database of MSK-authored publications. As you can see from Dr. Thompson’s Synapse profile, however, only his works produced while affiliated with MSK are included.

All four of these resources include options for exporting records to citation management tools like Endnote  (see the MSK Library’s workshop schedule for Endnote training options). Once the citation records are transferred from each of these four resources (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Synapse) into Endnote, the duplicates can be removed, leaving a unique list of titles that can be formatted and added to the CV.

Note: These four resources will identify scholarly publications by the author. If citations for books and government reports, or works published in popular magazines, newspapers, social media outlets, etc., are also needed, additional databases like GeneralOneFile should be consulted, in addition to Google, Google Scholar, WorldCat, NLM LocatorPlus, Library of Congress Catalog, and possibly other sources.

Feel free to Ask Us if you have any questions or would like to schedule a training consultation on this topic.