Making literature reviews more ethical: a researcher and health sciences librarian collaborative process

Background: With emphasis on evidence-based medical care, 'evidence' is often the result of literature reviews. Hence, the critical question, " are literature reviews comprehensive?" Aim: This study compares the literature generated by a researcher and a health sciences librarian (HSL). Methods: The Research Associate and the HSL conducted a parallel, segregated literature search on 'patient-centered care'. Results: The Research Associate identified 215 manuscripts, and the HSL 129 manuscripts. Overlap was only 55 manuscripts. Differences in process and blind spots are discussed. Conclusion: To improve the quality of research outcomes, it seems prudent and ethical to have a synergistic collaboration between researchers and HSLs. Given that this is just one case study that has looked into the issue, further research is strongly encouraged. Literature reviews are not just compilations of easily accessible research and should not be taken lightly. Literature reviews are critical to decision-making in clinical trials, medical care and directions of health systems. We wanted to see if researchers and health science librarians working in isolation would create a robust and balanced literature review. This case study showed that both approaches have shortcomings. We recommend that researcher and health science librarian must work together for the success of improving medical care.