4.3.1. Inclusion

1. Academic peer-reviewed journal articles on EBIP and the digital era.

2. Time frame: January 2014 to April 2025.

3. Primary studies only reporting the study’s purpose, objective, population, methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

4. Studies in English language only.

5. Studies accessible to the researcher in full text.

6. Published in developing countries.

4.3.2. Exclusion

1. People’s views or opinions.

2. Reviews.

3. Studies not accessible to the researcher in full text.

5.1.1. Translation and Repackaging of Evidence in the Digital Era

Studies show that librarians in developing countries recognize the importance of information translation and repackaging for enhancing library services and collection development (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024; Aslam, 2018). EBIP involves identifying user needs, sourcing credible evidence, and presenting it in accessible formats such as LibGuides (Mwanzu et al., 2022), while data analytics from circulation, e-resource usage, and user surveys inform acquisition and weeding decisions. For instance, high usage of medical e-books can guide prioritized acquisitions, while low circulation may justify weeding to strengthen collection relevance.

Despite librarians’ strong organizational and dissemination skills (Oyadonghan et al., 2016), EBIP implementation was constrained by limited ICT skills, inadequate training, insufficient funding, and digital inequities such as poor Internet connectivity and uneven database access (Borbely & Némethi-Takács, 2023; Buarki et al., 2022; Etomaru et al., 2022). A significant gap identified the absence of evaluative studies assessing EBIP’s impact on library services and user outcomes in developing countries (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024).

These findings imply that partial EBIP adoption was shaped by systemic barriers, highlighting the need for targeted training, improved infrastructure, dedicated funding for knowledge translation, and research assessing EBIP effectiveness.

5.1.2. Improving Library Service Quality

The literature shows that EBIP is increasingly recognized as essential for enhancing library services, decision-making, and professional growth (Ajani et al., 2024; Obasola et al., 2022; Popoola et al., 2024). However, implementation levels differ considerably. Thorpe and Howlett (2020) outline five stages of EBIP adoption—ad hoc, justification, emergence, experiments, and transformation—indicating that librarians’ engagement depends on their understanding of EBP. While some institutions use EBIP systematically to improve service quality and support user needs, others apply it only sporadically, reflecting gaps in awareness, skills, and institutional support.

Training is consistently identified as central to effective implementation. Virtual EBIP training strengthens librarians’ critical thinking and evaluation skills (Esmaeilzad et al., 2023), structured search models improve user outcomes (Al-Moteri, 2023), and inadequate expertise limits integration into practice (Luo, 2018). Although user feedback and data-informed approaches demonstrate EBIP’s practical value, its adoption remains uneven due to limited curriculum integration and inconsistent professional development. Overall, the findings indicate that EBIP enhances service quality when supported by adequate training and organizational commitment, yet broader adoption requires more structured strategies across the library sector.

5.1.3. Library and Information Science Evaluation, Monitoring, Performance and Decision-Making

The reviewed literature, as summarised in Table 1 (Ajani et al., 2024; Al-Moteri, 2023; Azam & Ahmad, 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Elueze, 2016; Esmaeilzad et al., 2023; Lynch et al., 2020; Masinde et al., 2021; Mustafa & Noorhidawati, 2020; Popoola et al., 2024), shows that EBIP extends beyond traditional library functions and plays a critical role in strengthening multiple dimensions of LIS practice in the digital era. EBIP supports evaluating performance, improving cost-effectiveness, and enhancing user-centered services, while contributing to strategic planning and resource optimization in daily library operations, including collection development, space management, usage monitoring, and quality control. It also informs technical and administrative tasks such as cataloguing, indexing, archiving, administration, and preservation (Azam & Ahmad, 2024). These findings align with those of Ochôa and Pinto (2020), who demonstrate how EBIP can be applied to assess LIS performance in relation to sustainable development goals. Their four-step framework—pre-planning, planning, implementing, and advocating with evidence—illustrates how libraries can integrate EBIP into multidisciplinary contexts to enhance sustainability, guide decision-making, and address community-specific information gaps, such as improving electronic resource subscriptions based on statistical demand.

While Ochôa and Pinto (2020) underscore the broad applicability of EBIP, Thorpe and Howlett (2020) highlight a contrasting challenge: EBIP adoption often relies more on individual motivation than on institutional policy. Despite its proven value in improving service quality, many libraries lack structured organizational support to embed EBIP into routine practice. This gap is particularly significant in the digital era, where rapid technological change increases the need for systematic, evidence-based approaches but institutions continue to face skill, policy, and resource limitations. The findings further show that EBIP enables librarians to use data analytics more effectively to inform administrative and management decisions, including technical services such as cataloguing. For example, analyzing online public access catalog search data and user feedback can reveal issues like outdated subject headings and inconsistent metadata, prompting updates to controlled vocabularies, investment in staff training, and the incorporation of user tagging features. Although such changes are challenging, they improve resource discoverability, reduce cataloguing errors, and enhance the overall usability of the catalogue.

Authors such as Lloyd et al. (2024), Rysavy and Michalak (2019), and Sewell and Cowell (2020) emphasize the growing importance of digital tools such as LibInsight, Google Sheets, Excel, and Springshare’s LibApps in supporting EBIP through data analytics across circulation, information services, and broader library operations. However, some studies reveal mixed outcomes. For instance, Mustafa and Noorhidawati (2020) report management support for using usage statistics in electronic resource acquisition but find no significant relationship between evidence-based librarianship and actual acquisition decisions. Similarly, Popoola et al. (2024) shows that African health librarians apply EBIP in resource allocation and information dissemination but struggle with inadequate funding and skills.

These findings suggest that while EBIP holds significant potential to enhance service quality, innovation, and sustainability in the digital era, realising its full impact requires institutional commitment to training, mentorship, and structured frameworks that promote widespread adoption.

5.1.4. Enhancement of Information Literacy Training, Teaching and Imparting Skills

As seen in Table 2 (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024; Aslam, 2018; Azam & Ahmad, 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Elueze, 2016; Lynch et al., 2021; Masinde et al., 2021; Mustafa & Noorhidawati, 2020; Obasola et al., 2022; Oyadonghan et al., 2016; Popoola et al., 2024), part 4, Azam and Ahmad (2024) show that data analytics can identify user needs and guide improvements in services such as information literacy training. Their findings align with Azami et al. (2020), who emphasise that EBIP enhances information literacy, supports decision-making, and reduces errors. In healthcare, integrating EBIP into training enables practitioners to use information more effectively, improving clinical decisions. Health librarians are increasingly equipped to teach EBP (Maggio et al., 2015; Sabey & Biddle, 2021), while De Brún (2015) highlights that information literacy tools are essential for applying evidence-based information and should be embedded in curricula.

These studies demonstrate EBIP’s importance in LIS and its relevance across sectors. In developing countries, limited access to evidence-based information underscores the need for awareness, training, and frameworks to strengthen decision-making and service delivery in areas such as agriculture, health sciences, and nutrition.

5.1.5. Problem-Solving

The findings in Table 2 (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024; Aslam, 2018; Azam & Ahmad, 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Elueze, 2016; Lynch et al., 2021; Masinde et al., 2021; Mustafa & Noorhidawati, 2020; Obasola et al., 2022; Oyadonghan et al., 2016; Popoola et al., 2024), part 5, show that libraries use various digital tools and content types—from library management systems and social media to multimedia, research data, and user-generated content—to address challenges such as low user turnout, search difficulties, and circulation issues (Ajani et al., 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021). Having reliable evidence readily available enables librarians to resolve user problems quickly and effectively. Ajani et al. (2024) and Chigwada and Kasiroori (2021) align with Luo (2018) and Diekema et al. (2019), demonstrating that evidence is essential for identifying user needs and improving service quality. These studies collectively emphasize that librarians require credible, timely information to support decisions related to resource selection, service delivery, and user management. In the digital era, integrating digital tools and online resources strengthens EBP, enhancing access to relevant information and improving problem-solving across library operations. Leveraging these platforms can transform service efficiency and user experience.

5.1.6. Inculcate Critical Thinking Abilities for Librarians

Table 2 (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024; Aslam, 2018; Azam & Ahmad, 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Elueze, 2016; Lynch et al., 2021; Masinde et al., 2021; Mustafa & Noorhidawati, 2020; Obasola et al., 2022; Oyadonghan et al., 2016; Popoola et al., 2024), part 6 shows that Esmaeilzad et al. (2023) found a positive correlation between exposure to EBIP and enhanced critical thinking among health librarians, highlighting the importance of sustainable skills training. The study recommends integrating EBIP into library school curricula to strengthen critical thinking in future professionals. In the digital era, where information is vast and continually evolving, EBIP equips librarians to navigate complex information environments and make informed decisions that improve service delivery. Incorporating EBIP into education aligns with growing demands for digital literacy and evidence-based decision-making, ensuring librarians are prepared for a data-driven world.

5.1.7. Evidence Re-Use and Reversal

Lynch et al. (2021) and Masinde et al. (2021), as shown in Table 2 (Ahmad et al., 2019; Ajani et al., 2024; Aslam, 2018; Azam & Ahmad, 2024; Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Elueze, 2016; Lynch et al., 2021; Masinde et al., 2021; Mustafa & Noorhidawati, 2020; Obasola et al., 2022; Oyadonghan et al., 2016; Popoola et al., 2024), part 7, reports that some librarians resist adopting EBP, relying on anecdotal knowledge or outdated methods, a pattern also noted by Ruchon and Grad (2018), who highlight limited awareness of evidence reuse. In the digital age, where unverified information spreads easily (Dong et al., 2025), EBIP provides a structured process to addressing society needs backed up with evidence. It enables librarians to verify information, correct errors, and improve practice. This approach allows LIS professionals to re-evaluate long-standing services, such as replacing poorly attended in-person orientations with evidence-supported online tutorials, ultimately enhancing user engagement and service effectiveness. By promoting a culture of EBIP and combating evidence misuse, librarians can remain relevant and responsive to evolving information needs.

5.1.8. Advocacy

Librarians in developing countries use evidence of user feedback and research data management in the digital era to advocate as agents of development in the research community, as reported by Ajani et al. (2024), Lynch et al. (2021), and Masinde et al. (2021). Librarians are utilizing their ability to organize, disseminate, and curate data collaboratively in developing countries. However, these studies report that much more effort is needed regarding management support and dedicated time and effort in this area. This implies that when EBIP is harnessed well, user feedback and research data evidence can help librarians advocate for services and budget support.

5.2.1. Digital Divide and Inadequate Information and Communication Technology Infrastructure

This remains among the most pressing barriers in developing countries, unlike in more digitally connected regions. EBIP depends on gathering user evidence through surveys, digital analytics, access to quality evidence, and feedback tools. Collecting meaningful user data becomes difficult in areas with low digital penetration and poor Internet connections. As a result, libraries lack reliable evidence to guide service improvements or policy and decisions. Efforts to bridge the digital divide are noted with initiatives like Research4Life, open access, and donor-supported programs. These initiatives have improved access to high-quality evidence in many low-resource settings. They provide valuable tools that support librarians and researchers in applying EBIP. However, these efforts are hampered by persistent disparities in Internet connectivity, ICT infrastructure, and digital access (Ajani et al., 2024). Obasola et al. (2022) observe that these gaps disproportionately affect rural and underfunded areas, limiting librarians’ capacity in those settings to use evidence-based tools effectively.

5.2.2. Inability to Access Comprehensive Evidence and Data

This results in incomplete or biased data, undermining the accuracy of EBIP-driven decisions. Therefore, sustainable strategies such as government investment in ICT, institutional consortia for resource sharing, and adopting open-access initiatives may be critical for addressing infrastructural inequalities.

5.2.3. Lacks Sufficient Knowledge and Training in Digital Literacy for Evidence-Based Information Practice

Many librarians in developing countries lack sufficient knowledge and skills in digital literacy, data analytics, and online research methods, which are competencies essential for evaluating information critically and applying EBIP (Lund et al., 2023). This limits their ability to make evidence-informed decisions or critically assess digital services and tools. The digital divide concerns access to technology and the ability to use it effectively. Without sufficient skills, Ameen (2013) emphasizes that even when digital resources are available, librarians may be unable to interpret or apply evidence meaningfully. Embedding EBIP into LIS curricula (Azam & Ahmad, 2024), alongside continuous professional development and mentorship programs, can help close this skills gap and empower practitioners to use data effectively in decision-making.

Furthermore, these findings indicate that librarians’ lack of digital skills and technological capacity in some areas hinders their ability to collect, analyze, and apply evidence effectively. While support programs are helping to close the gap, sustained investment in infrastructure, training, and digital literacy may be essential support EBIP implementation for libraries in developing countries to deliver inclusive, data-informed, and user-centered services.

5.2.4. Funding and Resource Constraints

Funding and resource constraints further hinder EBIP implementation. EBIP relies heavily on access to digital resources such as databases, online journals, analytics tools, and Internet connectivity to gather and analyze evidence. Limited budgets restrict access to training, subscription-based databases, and software needed for analytics (Ajani et al., 2024; Popoola et al., 2024). Moreover, overreliance on donor-driven initiatives often creates sustainability issues once external funding ends (Obasola et al., 2022). To counter this, libraries may explore innovative and sustainable financing models, including cost-sharing arrangements, public-private partnerships, and strategic prioritization of low-cost, high-impact interventions such as training in open-source data analysis tools.

5.2.5. Unreliable Evidence and Weak Research Culture

Unreliable evidence and weak research culture also remain a concern. In many contexts, weak research output, poor-quality studies, and insufficiently contextualized evidence limit the strength of EBIP (Chigwada & Kasiroori, 2021; Lynch et al., 2021). Language and cultural barriers further restrict evidence accessibility, while limited user feedback mechanisms result in incomplete insights into community needs (Ajani et al., 2024). Since EBIP depends heavily on reliable user evidence gathered through surveys, analytics, and feedback tools, these gaps undermine its practical impact. Strengthening local research capacity, encouraging systematic reviews, peer reviews, and evidence synthesis, and developing culturally responsive knowledge resources can improve the evidence base and make EBIP more relevant to diverse contexts. LIS should develop policies, plans, and budgets that encourage or motivate the research culture, as well as peer reviews and feedback mechanisms.

5.2.6. Organizational Environment and Cultural Factors

Organizational environment and cultural factors within libraries also play a decisive role. Limited staff numbers, time constraints, and weak institutional support discourage evidence use in daily practice (Azam & Ahmad, 2024).

5.2.7. Low Awareness of Evidence-Based Information Practice’s Value

Low awareness of EBIP’s value leads to resistance to changing traditional practices, and weak professional cultures around evidence diminish motivation (Masinde et al., 2021; Lund et al., 2023). Addressing these barriers may require strong leadership, supportive policies embedding EBIP into workflows, and the recognition of evidence-informed initiatives through incentives and professional recognition.

5.3.1. Scarcity of Empirical Research on Evidence-Based Information Practice in Developing-Country Contexts

Only ten studies met the inclusion criteria out of 6,693 records, highlighting a significant lack of empirical work examining how EBIP is practiced within developing countries, especially in Africa. Much of the global EBIP literature originates from developed regions, leaving developing contexts underrepresented. This implies that more research on this topic is needed.

5.3.2. Absence of Impact Evaluations of Evidence-Based Information Practice Practices

While existing studies describe EBIP activities, none assess the impact of EBIP on service quality, user satisfaction, decision-making efficiency, or cost-effectiveness, limiting understanding of EBIP’s practical value.

5.3.3. Overconcentration on Academic and Health Libraries

Most studies focus on academic and health science libraries, with very little research conducted in public libraries, school libraries, community libraries, or rural information settings. This skews the literature and neglects sectors where EBIP may be most needed.

5.3.4. Limited Exploration of Digital, Analytical, and Evidence-Based Information Practice Competencies

Although EBIP in the digital era relies heavily on ICT, digital literacy, and data analytics skills, few studies have examined the specific digital competencies librarians require to generate, interpret, and use evidence. The relationship between digital skill levels and EBIP adoption remains unclear. Evidence on how EBIP is embedded in LIS curricula in terms of training models, pedagogical approaches, and professional development strategies is insufficient.

5.3.5. Inadequate Examination of Organizational Barriers

Existing studies only briefly mention issues such as poor Internet connectivity, limited funding, and inadequate access to scholarly databases. They lack a detailed, systematic analysis of how these institutional challenges affect EBIP implementation.

5.3.6. Lack of Context-Appropriate Evidence-Based Information Practice Frameworks for Developing Countries

No study has evaluated EBIP frameworks tailored to the constraints and realities of developing countries. Evidence is lacking on how EBIP processes can be adapted to resource-limited, infrastructure-poor, or multilingual environments.

5.3.7. Unclear Evidence on Digital Evidence Workflows

There is limited understanding of how librarians collect, manage, analyze, and translate digital usage data such as circulation statistics, e-resource logs, and analytics.

5.3.8. Minimal Evidence on Library User Influence on Evidence-Based Information Practice Practices

User-generated evidence is central to EBIP, yet few studies explore how users contribute feedback, how librarians incorporate this feedback into decisions, or how user engagement influences EBIP practices.