Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association最新文献

Introduction: Libraries have provided mediated search services for more than forty years without a practice standard to guide the execution of searches, training of searchers, or evaluation of search performance. A pan-Canadian group of librarians completed a study of the literature on mediated search practices from 2014-2017 as a first step in addressing this deficit.

Methods: We used a three-phase, six-part content analysis process to examine and analyze published guidance on literature searching. Card sorting, Delphi methods, and an online questionnaire were then used to validate our findings and build a code of practice.

Results: Our code of practice for mediated searching lists eighty-five search tasks arranged in performance order, within five progressive levels of search complexity. A glossary of 150 search terms supports the code of practice.

Discussion: The research literature on mediated search methods is sparse and fragmented, lacking currency and a shared vocabulary. A code of practice for mediated searching will provide clarity in terminology, approach, and methods. This code of practice will provide a unified and convenient reference for training a new hire, upholding standards of search service delivery, or educating the next wave of health library professionals.

Introduction: Mobile devices and mobile applications facilitate access to clinical evidence at the point-of-care. Medical libraries play an important role in medical trainees' education, by subscribing to quality resources and by providing help and guidance on what apps to use. This study's goal was to explore medical trainees' mobile applications use in the clinical setting to help inform collection development's decisions and to provide insight on educational outreach. Perceived barriers and benefits of medical app use by clinical trainees was also explored.

Methods: A brief online survey (English and French) was sent to all University of Ottawa clerkship medical students and residents. The questionnaire consisted of multiple choices, Likert-scale, and open-ended questions.

Results: 208 English and 9 French responses were received. UpToDate was the most frequently used app, followed by MedCalc, Spectrum (CHEO) and Medscape. Respondents used medical apps mostly before and after meeting with patients and rarely while interacting with patients. Main benefits identified of medical app use were helping with decision-making, quick access to trustworthy clinical information, help with diagnosis and treatment options (e.g. medication dosage, drug interaction). Main barriers identified were costs, appearing unprofessional, lack of Canadian content and spotty hospital WiFi.

Conclusion: Libraries' involvement in providing access to trustworthy clinical resources to medical trainees is important to help shape trainees' development as medical professionals. Outreach to learners in the clinical setting is crucial to educate on what apps are available to them through the library collection.

Introduction: Finding efficient ways to meet the growing demand for library systematic review support is imperative for facilitating the production of high-quality research. The objectives of this study were threefold: 1) to ascertain the systematic review support provided by health sciences libraries at Ontario medical schools and their affiliated hospitals, 2) to determine the perceived educational needs by researchers at these institutions, and 3) to assess the potential usefulness of freely available, online educational modules for researchers that discuss all stages of the systematic review process.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in June and July of 2020. Data was analyzed and presented using median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous measures, and in proportions for categorical measures.

Results: 13 of 19 libraries invited provided usable data. Most libraries spent more time supporting systematic reviews via collaboration and participation than by providing educational support. The perceived needs of library users were contrary to the perceived gaps in researcher support provided by the library/institution. All libraries reported they would find freely available, online educational modules useful for training researchers.

Discussion: The next steps for our inter-professional research team will be to develop freely available, online education modules that introduce researchers to all stages of the systematic review process. These modules cannot replace the value that direct support from librarians, biostatisticians or methodology experts can provide, however, they may offer a more efficient way for libraries to familiarize researchers and trainees with best practices and universally accepted reporting guidelines for performing a high-quality review.

Introduction: Students in Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME/UME) programs face a variety of stressors that can affect well-being. To address this, the Committee on Accreditation of Canadian Medical Schools (CACMS) mandates that medical schools offer support and programming that promotes student well-being. Academic librarians are accustomed to providing outreach that meets their faculties' needs. Therefore, the goal of this study was to explore if Canadian undergraduate medical education librarians are supporting medical student wellness at their medical schools, and how.

Methods: A bilingual, electronic survey containing multiple choice and open-ended questions was distributed across two Canadian health sciences library listservs during the summer of 2020. Librarians supporting UGME/UME programs now or within the last three years were invited to participate.

Results: 22 Responses were received, and 17 complete datasets were included in the final results. The majority of respondents have encountered a medical student in distress (n=10) and have adjusted their teaching style or materials to help reduce stress in medical students (n=9). Other initiatives such as resource purchasing, wellness-themed displays, planning wellness-themed events and spaces, and partnerships on campus in support of medical student wellness were less common.

Discussion: The data in this study provides evidence that Canadian undergraduate medical education librarians are mindful of medical student well-being, and are taking steps to provide relevant support to this learner group. Librarians could adopt similar initiatives at their libraries to show support for learner wellness, and enhance their programs' accreditation efforts in this area.

Introduction: Systematic reviews are a growing research methodology in the health sciences, and in other disciplines, having a significant impact on librarian workload. In a follow up to an earlier study, an environmental scan was conducted at Queen's University to determine what has changed, if anything, since the introduction of a tiered service for knowledge synthesis by examining review publications where at least one co-author was from Queen's University.

Methods: A search was conducted in PubMed and the Joanna Briggs database to find systematic reviews and meta-analyses with at least one author from Queen's University for the five-year time since the last environmental scan. Reviews were categorized by the degree of involvement of the librarian(s) regardless of their institutional affiliation: librarian as co-author, librarian named in the acknowledgements, no known librarian involvement in the review.

Results: Of 453 systematic reviews published in the five-year time frame, nearly 20% (89) had a librarian named as co-author. A further 24.5% (110) acknowledged the role of a librarian in the search, either in the acknowledgements section or in the body of the text of the article. In just over half of reviews (235 or 51.8%) a librarian was either not involved, or was not explicitly acknowledged. More librarians and more institutions were represented in the period of 2016-2020 than in 2010-2015.

Conclusion: In the five years since the last environmental scan, an increasing number of reviews recognized the role of the librarian in publishing systematic reviews, either through co-authorship or named acknowledgement. This also suggests that as more librarians have become involved in systematic reviews, librarian capacity for this work has increased compared to five years ago.