Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association最新文献

This paper describes the search approach for preprints for a post COVID-19 condition (i.e., long COVID) scoping review, including source selection, search strategy development, challenges, and insights throughout a project life cycle. With the growth of medical preprints since the COVID-19 pandemic, information professionals and researchers should be aware that preprints are possible sources of evidence and be prepared to manage them in evidence reviews for COVID-19 topics and beyond. Preprints are not peer-reviewed but can include important evidence about emerging topics. Because of the importance of preprints to the scoping review, a preprint search of Europe PubMed Central (PMC) was added. Europe PMC and similar aggregators combine multiple preprint servers and often have Boolean search, but sometimes limited search functionalities or few export options. Strategy translation encountered challenges such as varying and inconsistent terminology for post-COVID-19 condition, a complex search, and negotiating large numbers of preprints with resource constraints. Europe PMC identified additional preprints for inclusion due to additional preprint server coverage. It was helpful to limit the preprint search to the title and abstract fields, and to run an extra Internet search for publication of included study preprints. Challenges and potential solutions are summarized to support those conducting preprint searches for COVID-19 and other topics.

Medical libraries had to swiftly change how instruction services were provided in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This article describes a Quality Improvement (QI) project to assess one hospital library's move to virtual instructional services. Information was gathered via a survey to Canadian hospital library workers and a focus group with internal staff with instructional responsibilities. Moving to online instruction increased audience attendance and garnered positive feedback, however library instructors report experiencing uncertainty about quality and effectiveness of online instruction. The article concludes with a description of planned actions to improve online instructional services in an urban research and teaching hospital library environment.

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ontario-based Centre for Effective Practice (CEP) established the COVID-19 Resource Centre (CRC) in March 2020. This platform rapidly became a critical source of clinical and practice guidance for primary care providers, highlighting the importance of effective information synthesis during public health emergencies.

Description: The article discusses the development of the CRC, emphasizing the application of librarianship principles in navigating the challenges posed by the pandemic's information overload and the scarcity of evidence. It outlines the strategies for literature searching, appraisal, and evidence synthesis that were employed to ensure the content's accuracy and utility. The CRC's evolution is presented within the context of its goal to efficiently bridge the gap between evidence and clinical practice, underscoring the collaborative efforts and innovative methodologies that contributed to its success.

Outcomes: The CRC has served as an invaluable resource, attracting close to 185,000 visitors from Ontario, across Canada, and internationally. According to survey feedback, 89% of users reported enhanced knowledge of COVID-19 evidence and policies, and 87% stated that the vaccine information directly informed their practice. These statistics underscore the CRC's role in supporting informed decision-making among healthcare providers.

Discussion: The CRC marked the CEP's first foray into real-time evidence-based tool development. Facing challenges of expanding information volumes, an unpredictable information landscape, and the need for swift adaptation to new developments, the CRC emerged as a critical resource, enhancing credibility for the CEP, and fostering new partnerships. This journey underscores the importance of librarianship skills-critical appraisal, evidence synthesis, and knowledge translation-in enhancing service delivery.

Introduction: It is well documented that librarian involvement in systematic reviews generally increases quality of reporting and the review overall. We used bibliometric analysis methods to analyze the level of librarian involvement in systematic reviews conducted at the University of Alberta (U of A).

Methods: Using Web of Science (WoS), we searched for systematic reviews completed in the years 2016-2020 with a U of A co-author. Systematic reviews identified through WoS were screened in two phases: (i) exclusion of duplicates, protocols, other types of reviews, and systematic review methodology literature to leave true systematic review publications, and (ii) screening for level of librarian involvement (acknowledgement, co-author, or no involvement).

Results: 640 reviews were analyzed for the following categories: (i) librarian named as a coauthor; (ii) librarian named in the acknowledgements section; (iii) librarian mentioned in the body of the manuscript; (iv) no librarian involvement. We identified 152 reviews who named a librarian as a co-author on the paper, 125 reviews named a librarian in the acknowledgements section, and 67 reviews mentioned a librarian in the body of the review without naming them as a co-author or in an acknowledgement. WoS Research Areas were used to identify disciplines that used librarian support and those that did not. A keyword network analysis revealed research areas that were very active in producing systematic reviews, while also providing information on the areas publishing systematic reviews without librarian support.

Conclusion: There is a great deal of variation in how the work of librarians is reflected in systematic reviews. This was particularly apparent in reviews where a librarian was mentioned in the body of the review but they were not named as an author or formally acknowledged. Continuing to educate researchers about the work of librarians is crucial to fully represent the value librarians bring to systematic reviews. Bibliometric analysis provides useful insights on service gaps for specific disciplines or research areas that are currently not using librarian support in systematic review publications, which can help inform service planning.

Introduction: Librarians continually advocate for the expertise they can bring to knowledge synthesis research projects. Professional associations like the Canadian Health Libraries Association aim to promote librarians and information professionals as partners in health research. This push for representation must happen at a policy level to enact change. To that purpose, we explored the degree to which the inclusion of librarians and information professionals is represented at the funding level by healthcare research organizations in Canada.

Methods: We used a list of health research funding agencies generated from Scopus searches and an independent search of Canadian health research institutions, governmental health authorities, professional associations, and research-oriented universities to identify research grants designed for knowledge synthesis research. We examined these grants to determine whether they require or specifically mention librarians in their eligibility criteria.

Results: Of the 14 knowledge synthesis grants we identified, only one required a health librarian as a member of the research team in the grant eligibility criteria. Four grants "strongly recommended" the inclusion of librarians on the research team, though this inclusion was not a contingency for funding.

Discussion: Most knowledge synthesis grants in Canada do not require, recommend, or mention librarians as members of the research or authorship team. Evidence suggests that librarian involvement substantially improves the quality of knowledge synthesis research projects; it would therefore benefit both librarians and knowledge synthesis work to advocate for librarian involvement as a contingency for grant funding.