Health Information and Libraries Journal最新文献

Background: Health care is of great importance to individuals and those funding health care. The academic community is interested in how health care can be delivered and the role of health information.

Objectives-: This study uses bibliometrics to identify novel research subjects, highly cited literature, worldwide cooperation relationships, author distribution and cooperative network, journal distribution, and research hotspots in the field of health information.

Methods: Data were collected from the Web of Science database, and the 3525 items of literature retrieved were analysed with word frequency, social network, and cluster analysis methods.

Results: The findings indicate that the Internet, Health Information, Health Information Technology, Health Literacy, and Health Information Exchange are the top five health information research topics. There is a close relationship between the research themes of COVID-19, Mental Health, Public Health, and Health Information Seeking. The main co-operative network is centred around the United States and the United Kingdom. College students (health information), young people (health information), and privacy issues (concerning health information) are the recent areas of research.

Conclusions: This study can provide some insights for practitioners in libraries and health information institutions, for topic selection in health journals, and for international cooperation among educators.

Artificial intelligence (AI) provides new challenges for knowledge and library professionals (KLPs) working in healthcare. In NHS England, KLPs created the AI Literacy Group, part of the NHS England Workforce, Transformation and Education (NHSE W,T&E) Current & Emerging Technology Community of Practice (CET CoP). The aim of the group was to develop their understanding of the changing landscape and understand how AI could be used in healthcare organisations and knowledge and library services (KLS). The group developed a series of presentations that KLPs could use to develop their own understanding of AI and which could be adapted for use in their local organisations. Case studies from KLPs working in two NHS organisations discuss the use of the presentations to train clinical and non-clinical staff, and consider their impact and next steps. Through collaboration, the group was able to learn together, develop a shared understanding of AI and create training resources to benefit the KLP community. The group has evolved to consider new areas of learning relating to the adoption of AI and to review the content of the presentations to ensure that they are up to date and relevant in this ever-changing landscape.

Introduction: Although thematic analysis of health librarianship (HL) presentations at conferences in the USA exists, no similar research has been reported focused on HL at UK conferences.

Objectives: To determine trends in HL conference presentations from 2017 to 2022 at three UK-based HL conferences and the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) conferences.

Methods: Thematic analysis of conference programmes obtained from websites, the Internet Archive Wayback Machine and conference organisers.

Results: A total of 226 HL-related conference presentations were identified across all the examined conference programmes. Eight themes emerged: being a Healthcare Librarian; Digital Working; Finding the Evidence; Generating Research; Strategic Library Management; Literacies; Other; and Using the Evidence. 'Being a Healthcare Librarian' (n = 54) and 'Strategic Library Management' (n = 53) were the most prominent cross-conference themes.

Discussion: Presentations at HL-specific conferences provide a wider range of themes than CILIP conferences, with 'Being a Healthcare Librarian' absent from CILIP conferences but 'Literacies' appearing in similar numbers at both. Differences in conference formats and the COVID-19 pandemic likely influenced presentation numbers.

Conclusion: HL conference themes are not directly reflected in CILIP conferences. NHS Knowledge and Library Services staff should be encouraged to undertake and disseminate original research, creating a UK evidence base for healthcare librarianship.

Background: With the increasing adoption of digital health, health informatics and information management (HIIM) professionals are more essential than ever before. This paper explores the difficulties encountered when trying to classify and track the HIIM workforce internationally.

Methods: A historic document analysis method to explore how the International Standard of Classifications (ISCO) and the available national standards from countries using an alternative classification represent the HIIM workforce.

Results: There is little recognition of the HIIM workforce in the ISCO and national standards. Where an entry did exist, more than 90% were in a non-health major group. At the major group level, 16.7% (7/42) of entries specified an administrative term, 11.9% (5/42) a professional term, 9.5% (4/42) a technician term and 61.9% (26) including both professional and technician as the description.

Discussion: Most country-level classification systems classified HIIM as a technical occupation rather than a professional occupation. The term 'digital health' did not appear in any classification reviewed.

Conclusion: As the requirement for formal training increases globally in the HIIM occupation, classification systems will need to include or reclassify HIIM to reflect it as a professional occupation, with a clear structure and requiring specific education and specialised skills.

Background: Access to tailored evidence syntheses can support frontline clinical staff to make evidence-informed care decisions, but evaluation of such services requires understanding of user needs within context.

Objectives: We evaluated an Evidence Access service by clinical librarians in a mental health trust in northern England to assess impacts on staff decision making and identify areas for improvement.

Methods: The evaluation was guided by the integrated Promoting Action on Research in Health Services framework. We evaluated the service through a survey, semi-structured interviews, and service mapping with the library team.

Results: Staff who used the service valued it highly and particularly appreciated the rapid response and trusting relationships with library staff. Mental health nurses required proactive support to encourage them to access the service.

Discussion: The service could be used to generate clinically relevant research questions in collaboration with researchers, but would require support for the negotiation of the value of different questions and understanding of each other's needs and priorities.

Conclusions: An Evidence Access service provided by a clinical librarian is highly valued by mental health staff. Collaboration between researchers and clinicians to identify and respond to evidence gaps would require commitment to building relationships and capacity.

Objective: To evaluate the use and useability of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database's 'Evidence in your inbox' e-mail alert service.

Materials and methods: An explanatory sequential design consisting of a usage evaluation, cross-sectional survey, and semi-structured interviews. Usage was evaluated using routinely collected data from October 2015 to March 2021: number of subscribers, number of articles, open rates, and click-through rates. Subscribers were subdivided by level of engagement. All subscribers were invited to participate in a 17-question online survey. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants who completed the survey.

Results: The service sent a minimum of 121 or a maximum of 431 articles, on average, each month across 15 feeds to 16,556 subscribers. Overtime, the rate of opening and clicking on links within e-mails decreased. Low engagers (62%) subscribed to 3.5 (95% CI 3.7-3.4) more feeds than high engagers (23%) and 2.8 (95% CI 3.0-2.6) more than moderate engagers (15%). Seventy-one subscribers completed the survey, 89% of whom were satisfied with the service and who thought it was an efficient way to be updated on evidence (98%). Six subscribers participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis of interviews identified five facilitators and four barriers to using the service, with three potential solutions to aid useability.

Discussion and conclusion: The format and structure of the service may facilitate its use and usability. Addressing barriers of having too few or too many articles, and lack of time to read full articles may enhance the usability of 'Evidence in your inbox'.

Background: Health disparities remain as a systemic challenge. With the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement and scant evidence of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives for workers in health science libraries, this scoping review maps evidence that can be incorporated into a culture of change.

Objectives: To identify the extent, type, and location of DEI initiatives being conducted in health science libraries for library workers.

Methods: Eight databases were systematically searched for literature from 2014 onwards, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Four reviewers were involved in screening and data extraction.

Results: Reviewers excluded 6712 title/abstracts. A total of 177 articles progressed to full-text screening, where 153 were excluded. The final number of articles that underwent data extraction was 24.

Discussion: Initiatives primarily occurred in academic libraries, led by library workers. Identities mostly focused on were gender, race, and sexuality, while some initiatives focused on general DEI concepts. Most literature pertained to library patrons, demonstrating a gap in reported initiatives for health science library workers. Assessment of initiatives was lacking, with no validated assessment tools used. All of the articles focused on either the United States or Canada.

Conclusion: Diversity continues to be a challenge within the profession; this should be mitigated through recruitment and retention strategies along with mentorship for new and diverse librarians.

Background: Continual evidence surveillance is an integral feature of living guidelines. The Australian Stroke Guidelines include recommendations on 100 clinical topics and have been 'living' since 2018.

Objectives: To describe the approach for establishing and evaluating an evidence surveillance system for the living Australian Stroke Guidelines.

Methods: We developed a pragmatic surveillance system based on an analysis of the searches for the 2017 Stroke Guidelines and evaluated its reliability by assessing the potential impact on guideline recommendations. Search retrieval and screening workload are monitored monthly, together with the frequency of changes to the guideline recommendations.

Results: Evidence surveillance was guided by practical considerations of efficiency and sustainability. A single PubMed search covering all guideline topics, limited to systematic reviews and randomised trials, is run monthly. The search retrieves about 400 records a month of which a sixth are triaged to the guideline panels for further consideration. Evaluations with Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register demonstrated the robustness of adopting this more restrictive approach. Collaborating with the guideline team in designing, implementing and evaluating the surveillance is essential for optimising the approach.

Conclusion: Monthly evidence surveillance for a large living guideline is feasible and sustainable when applying a pragmatic approach.

Background: The inclusion of marginalized populations in health information research is crucial for ensuring equitable health outcomes and addressing systemic disparities. However, underrepresentation of these groups remains a significant issue, particularly in health misinformation correction research.

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the inclusion and diversity of health misinformation correction studies in terms of their sample characteristics, correction message features, and study characteristics.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review and identified 192 empirical studies from 158 publications that met our inclusion criteria.

Discussion: The results indicate that the available literature on health misinformation correction has not adequately incorporated the inclusion and diversity of marginalized populations. This gap persists across various essential research elements, such as sample characteristics and correction message features.

Conclusions: There is a critical need to prioritize inclusion and diversity in health misinformation correction research. Addressing this gap will contribute to a more equitable and inclusive scientific process, ensuring the perspectives of diverse populations are considered and included.

Background: There is little evidence on the use or potential use of NHS repositories within the UK.

Methods: A mixed methods (quantitative/qualitative) study of two repositories: amber-the home of ambulance service research, and East Midlands Evidence Repository (EMER). A structured online questionnaire was distributed via the repository home page, and promoted via social media, email networks, and lists. Next, three research leaders were interviewed in person online (see Appendix S1, supporting information). Transcripts of the recorded interviews were summarised using ChatGPT 3.5.

Results: From the 148 questionnaire responses, 38% of respondents had used an NHS repository. Librarian activities were key to encouraging repository use (that is, searching and depositing materials). ResearchGate was the most widely used alternative. Perceived benefits of using repositories included open access to materials, and knowledge sharing with colleagues. Users generally did not know the deposit process, and over 50% of respondents were unaware of Green Open Access.

Discussion: Building greater awareness, and institutional support is key to increasing repository usage. Marketing activities and educating researchers about the benefits of engaging with the repository are fundamental.

Conclusion: NHS librarians need to market NHS repositories using principles of knowledge management and ensure that the grey literature of research and evaluation reports in repositories is better used.