In 2020 - 2021 the Robert B. Greenblatt, M.D. Library at Augusta University implemented two projects leveraging virtual reality (VR) technology to provide immersive experiential learning opportunities for health sciences students. The projects shared some commonalities in spite of having differing objectives and desired outcomes. These common facets led to the success of both projects and will be helpful for other institutions considering implementing VR projects.
{"title":"Providing health sciences education through virtual reality experiences.","authors":"Gail Kouame, Jennifer Davis, Lachelle Smith","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1632","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1632","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2020 - 2021 the Robert B. Greenblatt, M.D. Library at Augusta University implemented two projects leveraging virtual reality (VR) technology to provide immersive experiential learning opportunities for health sciences students. The projects shared some commonalities in spite of having differing objectives and desired outcomes. These common facets led to the success of both projects and will be helpful for other institutions considering implementing VR projects.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"833-834"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621681/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: Systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis projects require systematic search methods. Search systems require several essential attributes to support systematic searching; however, many systems used in evidence synthesis fail to meet one or more of these requirements. I undertook a qualitative study to examine the effects of these limitations on systematic searching and how searchers select information sources for evidence synthesis projects.
Methods: Qualitative data were collected from interviews with twelve systematic searchers. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.
Results: I used thematic analysis to identify two key themes relating to search systems: systems shape search processes, and systematic searching occurs within the information market. Many systems required for systematic reviews, in particular sources of unpublished studies, are not designed for systematic searching. Participants described various workarounds for the limitations they encounter in these systems. Economic factors influence searchers' selection of sources to search, as well as the degree to which vendors prioritize these users.
Conclusion: Interviews with systematic searchers suggest priorities for improving search systems, and barriers to improvement that must be overcome. Vendors must understand the unique requirements of systematic searching and recognize systematic searchers as a distinct group of users. Better interfaces and improved functionality will result in more efficient evidence synthesis.
{"title":"How do search systems impact systematic searching? A qualitative study.","authors":"Andy Hickner","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1647","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis projects require systematic search methods. Search systems require several essential attributes to support systematic searching; however, many systems used in evidence synthesis fail to meet one or more of these requirements. I undertook a qualitative study to examine the effects of these limitations on systematic searching and how searchers select information sources for evidence synthesis projects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Qualitative data were collected from interviews with twelve systematic searchers. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>I used thematic analysis to identify two key themes relating to search systems: systems shape search processes, and systematic searching occurs within the information market. Many systems required for systematic reviews, in particular sources of unpublished studies, are not designed for systematic searching. Participants described various workarounds for the limitations they encounter in these systems. Economic factors influence searchers' selection of sources to search, as well as the degree to which vendors prioritize these users.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Interviews with systematic searchers suggest priorities for improving search systems, and barriers to improvement that must be overcome. Vendors must understand the unique requirements of systematic searching and recognize systematic searchers as a distinct group of users. Better interfaces and improved functionality will result in more efficient evidence synthesis.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"774-782"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621724/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Spanish speaking healthcare providers, JUNTOS Center for Advancing Latino Health, and a medical librarian partnered to create a podcast on essential health topics relevant to the Latinx community. The podcasts were recorded in Spanish and included Spanish supplementary consumer health information from credible resources such as MedlinePlus en Espanol. The podcasts covered important topics about COVID-19 such as vaccines, clinical trials, and social distancing. It also includes other relevant topics that are affecting the Latinx community.
讲西班牙语的医疗保健提供者、JUNTOS促进拉丁裔健康中心和一名医学图书管理员合作创建了一个关于与拉丁裔社区相关的基本健康主题的播客。播客是用西班牙语录制的,其中包括来自MedlinePlus en Espanol等可靠资源的西班牙语补充消费者健康信息。播客涵盖了有关新冠肺炎的重要话题,如疫苗、临床试验和保持社交距离。它还包括影响拉丁裔社区的其他相关主题。
{"title":"JUNTOS Radio: a podcast created in collaboration with Spanish-speaking healthcare providers, Juntos Center for Advancing Latino Health, and a medical librarian.","authors":"Brenda M Linares, Mariana Ramirez","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1653","DOIUrl":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1653","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spanish speaking healthcare providers, JUNTOS Center for Advancing Latino Health, and a medical librarian partnered to create a podcast on essential health topics relevant to the Latinx community. The podcasts were recorded in Spanish and included Spanish supplementary consumer health information from credible resources such as MedlinePlus en Espanol. The podcasts covered important topics about COVID-19 such as vaccines, clinical trials, and social distancing. It also includes other relevant topics that are affecting the Latinx community.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"831-832"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621679/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gregg A Stevens, Martin Morris, Robin M N Parker, Francisco J Fajardo, Erica R Brody, Katie McLean
Objective: LGBTQ+ health research guides can strengthen the LGBTQ+ community through connecting people to quality health services and information, and previous studies have recommended that health sciences libraries create and maintain these guides. Little evidence exists, though, on how these guides are used and how well they meet the needs of LGBTQ+ users. Using retrospective data retrieved from multiple LGBTQ+ health research guides, we examined the categories of LGBTQ+ health information most used, as well as how often guides were accessed. Based on these results, we hope to find patterns which can lead to best practices for libraries.
Methods: Five North American academic health sciences libraries contributed select usage data from their LGBTQ+ health research guides, covering a three-year period (July 2018-June 2021). Data was analyzed in two ways. Firstly, the 20 most-clicked resources from each guide were categorized through open coding, to assess if certain information resource categories were more popular among guide users, allowing for inference of user needs. A time-series analysis was also conducted for two sites, using the Classical Seasonal Decomposition by Moving Averages method, to provide deeper insights into the data.
Results: Open coding data showed consumer health information resources were used more often than other health resource categories. Resources from more locally based organizations and those with provider and services information were heavily used, indicating that users may be looking for information connecting to local health services and providers. The time series analysis allowed the potential positive effect of guide promotion to be showcased in ways that would not have been clear from the raw data.
Conclusion: This study shows that people are accessing LGBTQ+ consumer health information through academic library research guides, with a preference for local information. Guide usage appears to be positively driven by outreach within one's institution and to the greater community. Locating external partners may increase guide impact and provide important links to local resources and services.
{"title":"LGBTQ+ health research guides: a multi-institutional analysis of usage patterns and user information needs.","authors":"Gregg A Stevens, Martin Morris, Robin M N Parker, Francisco J Fajardo, Erica R Brody, Katie McLean","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1661","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>LGBTQ+ health research guides can strengthen the LGBTQ+ community through connecting people to quality health services and information, and previous studies have recommended that health sciences libraries create and maintain these guides. Little evidence exists, though, on how these guides are used and how well they meet the needs of LGBTQ+ users. Using retrospective data retrieved from multiple LGBTQ+ health research guides, we examined the categories of LGBTQ+ health information most used, as well as how often guides were accessed. Based on these results, we hope to find patterns which can lead to best practices for libraries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five North American academic health sciences libraries contributed select usage data from their LGBTQ+ health research guides, covering a three-year period (July 2018-June 2021). Data was analyzed in two ways. Firstly, the 20 most-clicked resources from each guide were categorized through open coding, to assess if certain information resource categories were more popular among guide users, allowing for inference of user needs. A time-series analysis was also conducted for two sites, using the Classical Seasonal Decomposition by Moving Averages method, to provide deeper insights into the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Open coding data showed consumer health information resources were used more often than other health resource categories. Resources from more locally based organizations and those with provider and services information were heavily used, indicating that users may be looking for information connecting to local health services and providers. The time series analysis allowed the potential positive effect of guide promotion to be showcased in ways that would not have been clear from the raw data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that people are accessing LGBTQ+ consumer health information through academic library research guides, with a preference for local information. Guide usage appears to be positively driven by outreach within one's institution and to the greater community. Locating external partners may increase guide impact and provide important links to local resources and services.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"762-773"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621682/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Robert D Beckett, Yashawna Brattain, Judy Truong, Genevieve Engle
Objective: To evaluate tertiary drug information databases in terms of scope, consistency of content, and completeness of COVID-19 drug information.
Methods: Five electronic drug information databases: Clinical Pharmacology, Lexi-Drugs, AHFS DI (American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information), eFacts and Comparisons, and Micromedex In-Depth Answers, were evaluated in this cross-sectional evaluation study, with data gathered from October 2021 through February 2022. Two study investigators independently extracted data (parallel extraction) from each resource. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to evaluate scope (i.e., whether the resource addresses use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) and completeness of content (i.e., whether full information is provided related to the use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) based on a 10-point scale. To analyze consistency among resources for scope, the Fleiss multi-rater kappa was used. To analyze consistency among resources for type of recommendation (i.e., in favor, insufficient evidence, against), a two-way mixed effects intraclass coefficient was calculated.
Results: A total of 46 drug monographs, including 3 vaccination monographs, were evaluated. Use of the agents for treatment of COVID-19 was most frequently addressed in Lexi-Drugs (73.9%), followed by eFacts and Comparisons (71.7%), and Micromedex (54.3%). The highest overall median completeness score was held by AHFS DI followed by Micromedex, and Clinical Pharmacology. There was moderate consistency in terms of scope (kappa 0.490, 95% CI 0.399-0.581, p<0.001) and recommendations (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.518, 95% CI 0.385-0.651, p<0.001).
Conclusion: Scope and completeness results varied by resource, with moderate consistency of content among resources.
目的:从新冠肺炎药品信息的范围、内容的一致性和完整性等方面评价三级药品信息数据库。方法:在这项横断面评估研究中,使用2021年10月至2022年2月收集的数据,评估了五个电子药物信息数据库:临床药理学、Lexi Drugs、AHFS DI(美国医院处方服务药物信息)、eFacts and Comparisons和Micromedex In Depth Answers。两名研究研究人员从每个资源中独立提取数据(并行提取)。描述性统计主要用于基于10分制评估范围(即资源是否涉及新冠肺炎治疗或预防药物的使用)和内容的完整性(即是否提供了与新冠肺炎治疗或预防用药相关的完整信息)。为了分析范围资源之间的一致性,使用了Fleiss多评分kappa。为了分析推荐类型(即赞成、证据不足、反对)的资源一致性,计算了双向混合效应组内系数。结果:共评价46部药物专著,其中疫苗接种专著3部。Lexi-Drugs(73.9%)、eFacts and Comparisons(71.7%)和Micromedex(54.3%)中最常见的药物用于治疗新冠肺炎。总体完整性中位数得分最高的是AHFS DI,其次是Micromedex和Clinical Pharmacology。在范围方面存在中度一致性(kappa 0.490,95%CI 0.399-0.581,P结论:范围和完整性结果因资源而异,资源之间的内容具有中度一致性。
{"title":"Tertiary drug information sources for treatment and prevention of COVID-19.","authors":"Robert D Beckett, Yashawna Brattain, Judy Truong, Genevieve Engle","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1662","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate tertiary drug information databases in terms of scope, consistency of content, and completeness of COVID-19 drug information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five electronic drug information databases: Clinical Pharmacology, Lexi-Drugs, AHFS DI (American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information), eFacts and Comparisons, and Micromedex In-Depth Answers, were evaluated in this cross-sectional evaluation study, with data gathered from October 2021 through February 2022. Two study investigators independently extracted data (parallel extraction) from each resource. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to evaluate scope (i.e., whether the resource addresses use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) and completeness of content (i.e., whether full information is provided related to the use of the medication for treatment or prevention of COVID-19) based on a 10-point scale. To analyze consistency among resources for scope, the Fleiss multi-rater kappa was used. To analyze consistency among resources for type of recommendation (i.e., in favor, insufficient evidence, against), a two-way mixed effects intraclass coefficient was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 46 drug monographs, including 3 vaccination monographs, were evaluated. Use of the agents for treatment of COVID-19 was most frequently addressed in Lexi-Drugs (73.9%), followed by eFacts and Comparisons (71.7%), and Micromedex (54.3%). The highest overall median completeness score was held by AHFS DI followed by Micromedex, and Clinical Pharmacology. There was moderate consistency in terms of scope (kappa 0.490, 95% CI 0.399-0.581, p<0.001) and recommendations (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.518, 95% CI 0.385-0.651, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Scope and completeness results varied by resource, with moderate consistency of content among resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"783-791"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621729/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jane Morgan-Daniel, Lauren E Adkins, Margaret Ansell, Susan Harnett, Melissa L Rethlefsen
Background: In 2020 the Health Science Center Libraries (HSCL) at the University of Florida collaborated with the Okeechobee County Public library (OCPL) on their plan to install Little Free Libraries (LFLs) within their community. It was agreed that the HSCL would provide consumer health-related materials for the Little Free Libraries and training with the goal of improving health literacy, precision medicine, and increasing rural access to consumer health materials and services.
Case presentation: Using census data, the County Health Improvement Plan, and OCPL circulation data the team identified minority population groups, potential accessibility issues, and local consumer health information needs and barriers to select appropriate resources. Additionally, partnerships were created with the local Health Department, Parks and Recreation services, the Rotary Club, and other local organizations to make the project a success. A total of 424 books were selected for the LFLs and 40 unique online resources were selected, printed, and shipped to OCPL to be used during LFL reference sessions. Technology was purchased to assist OCPL with their planned community health reference outreach sessions. HSCL created and provided online training on facilitating consumer health outreach, conducting health information reference services, and promoting community engagement for OCPL.
Discussion: LFLs have become an important resource for lower-income rural families in Okeechobee. There are 7 LFLs in Okeechobee County, with a goal of eventually establishing 15 total to provide vital health resources and books. Over 2,456 items have been circulated among the 7 LFLs since May 2020. Overall, the project has been successful with positive feedback received from the community and with OCPL planning to continue to expand the project.
{"title":"Facilitating rural access to quality health information through Little Free Libraries.","authors":"Jane Morgan-Daniel, Lauren E Adkins, Margaret Ansell, Susan Harnett, Melissa L Rethlefsen","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1585","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1585","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2020 the Health Science Center Libraries (HSCL) at the University of Florida collaborated with the Okeechobee County Public library (OCPL) on their plan to install Little Free Libraries (LFLs) within their community. It was agreed that the HSCL would provide consumer health-related materials for the Little Free Libraries and training with the goal of improving health literacy, precision medicine, and increasing rural access to consumer health materials and services.</p><p><strong>Case presentation: </strong>Using census data, the County Health Improvement Plan, and OCPL circulation data the team identified minority population groups, potential accessibility issues, and local consumer health information needs and barriers to select appropriate resources. Additionally, partnerships were created with the local Health Department, Parks and Recreation services, the Rotary Club, and other local organizations to make the project a success. A total of 424 books were selected for the LFLs and 40 unique online resources were selected, printed, and shipped to OCPL to be used during LFL reference sessions. Technology was purchased to assist OCPL with their planned community health reference outreach sessions. HSCL created and provided online training on facilitating consumer health outreach, conducting health information reference services, and promoting community engagement for OCPL.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>LFLs have become an important resource for lower-income rural families in Okeechobee. There are 7 LFLs in Okeechobee County, with a goal of eventually establishing 15 total to provide vital health resources and books. Over 2,456 items have been circulated among the 7 LFLs since May 2020. Overall, the project has been successful with positive feedback received from the community and with OCPL planning to continue to expand the project.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"811-818"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621719/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While the Ebers Papyrus is understood to be one of the oldest and most complete contemporaneous perspectives on Ancient Egyptian healing practices, nothing has yet been said about the biography of its first English-language translator, Dr. Carl H. von Klein. A German immigrant and surgeon in the American Midwest, von Klein spent twenty-some years meticulously translating and annotating the Papyrus, but ultimately his manuscript was destroyed. In this paper, we examine the societal- and personal-scale forces that thwarted his efforts to transform our understanding of the history of medicine.
{"title":"Lost in translation: the history of the Ebers Papyrus and Dr. Carl H. von Klein.","authors":"Jane A Hartsock, Colin M E Halverson","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1755","DOIUrl":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1755","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the Ebers Papyrus is understood to be one of the oldest and most complete contemporaneous perspectives on Ancient Egyptian healing practices, nothing has yet been said about the biography of its first English-language translator, Dr. Carl H. von Klein. A German immigrant and surgeon in the American Midwest, von Klein spent twenty-some years meticulously translating and annotating the Papyrus, but ultimately his manuscript was destroyed. In this paper, we examine the societal- and personal-scale forces that thwarted his efforts to transform our understanding of the history of medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 4","pages":"844-851"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10621680/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71487479","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nell Aronoff, Molly K Maloney, Amy G Lyons, Elizabeth Stellrecht
Objective: We sought to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted academic health sciences library workshops. We hypothesized that health sciences libraries moved workshops online during the height of the pandemic and that they continued to offer workshops virtually after restrictions were eased. Additionally, we believed that attendance increased.
Methods: In March 2022, we invited 161 Association of American Health Sciences Libraries members in the US and Canada to participate in a Qualtrics survey about live workshops. Live workshops were defined as synchronous; voluntary; offered to anyone regardless of school affiliation; and not credit-bearing. Three time periods were compared, and a chi square test of association was conducted to evaluate the relationship between time period and workshop format.
Results: Seventy-two of 81 respondents offered live workshops. A chi square test of association indicated a significant association between time period and primary delivery method, chi-square (4, N=206) = 136.55, p< .005. Before March 2020, 77% of respondents taught in person. During the height of the pandemic, 91% taught online and 60% noted higher attendance compared to pre-pandemic numbers. During the second half of 2021, 65% of workshops were taught online and 43% of respondents felt that attendance was higher than it was pre-pandemic. Overall workshop satisfaction was unchanged (54%) or improved (44%).
Conclusion: Most health sciences librarians began offering online workshops following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than half of respondents were still teaching online in the second half of 2021. Some respondents reported increased attendance with similar levels of satisfaction.
{"title":"Health sciences library workshops in the COVID era: librarian perceptions and decision making.","authors":"Nell Aronoff, Molly K Maloney, Amy G Lyons, Elizabeth Stellrecht","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1663","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to determine how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted academic health sciences library workshops. We hypothesized that health sciences libraries moved workshops online during the height of the pandemic and that they continued to offer workshops virtually after restrictions were eased. Additionally, we believed that attendance increased.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In March 2022, we invited 161 Association of American Health Sciences Libraries members in the US and Canada to participate in a Qualtrics survey about live workshops. Live workshops were defined as synchronous; voluntary; offered to anyone regardless of school affiliation; and not credit-bearing. Three time periods were compared, and a chi square test of association was conducted to evaluate the relationship between time period and workshop format.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-two of 81 respondents offered live workshops. A chi square test of association indicated a significant association between time period and primary delivery method, chi-square (4, N=206) = 136.55, p< .005. Before March 2020, 77% of respondents taught in person. During the height of the pandemic, 91% taught online and 60% noted higher attendance compared to pre-pandemic numbers. During the second half of 2021, 65% of workshops were taught online and 43% of respondents felt that attendance was higher than it was pre-pandemic. Overall workshop satisfaction was unchanged (54%) or improved (44%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most health sciences librarians began offering online workshops following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than half of respondents were still teaching online in the second half of 2021. Some respondents reported increased attendance with similar levels of satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 3","pages":"657-664"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10361557/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9903243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: The Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) list, produced by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), has been used by clinicians and librarians for half a century for two main purposes: narrowing a literature search to clinically useful journals and identifying high priority titles for library collections. After documentation of low usage of the existing CCJ, a review was undertaken to assess current validity, followed by an update to current clinical needs.
Methods: As the subject coverage of the 50-year-old list had never been evaluated, the CCJ committee began its innovative step-wise approach by analyzing the existing subject scope. To determine whether clinical subjects had changed over the last half-century, the committee collected data on journal usage in hospitals and medical facilities, adding journal usage from Morning Report blogs recording the journal article citations used by physicians and residents in response to clinical questions. Patient-driven high-frequency diagnoses and subjects added contextual data by depicting the clinical environment.
Results: The analysis identified a total of 80 subjects and selected 241 journals for the updated Clinical Journals filter, based on actual clinical utility of each journal.
Discussion: These data-driven methods created a different framework for evaluating the structure and content of this filter. It is the real-world evidence needed to highlight CCJ clinical impact and push clinically useful journals to first page results. Since the new process resulted in a new product, the name warrants a change from Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) to Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). Therefore, the redesigned NLM Core Clinical Journals/AIM set from this point forward will be referred to as Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). The evidence-based process used to reframe evaluation of the clinical impact and utility of biomedical journals is documented in this article.
{"title":"PubMed's core clinical journals filter: redesigned for contemporary clinical impact and utility.","authors":"Michele Klein-Fedyshin, Andrea M Ketchum","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1631","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1631","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) list, produced by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), has been used by clinicians and librarians for half a century for two main purposes: narrowing a literature search to clinically useful journals and identifying high priority titles for library collections. After documentation of low usage of the existing CCJ, a review was undertaken to assess current validity, followed by an update to current clinical needs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As the subject coverage of the 50-year-old list had never been evaluated, the CCJ committee began its innovative step-wise approach by analyzing the existing subject scope. To determine whether clinical subjects had changed over the last half-century, the committee collected data on journal usage in hospitals and medical facilities, adding journal usage from Morning Report blogs recording the journal article citations used by physicians and residents in response to clinical questions. Patient-driven high-frequency diagnoses and subjects added contextual data by depicting the clinical environment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis identified a total of 80 subjects and selected 241 journals for the updated Clinical Journals filter, based on actual clinical utility of each journal.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These data-driven methods created a different framework for evaluating the structure and content of this filter. It is the real-world evidence needed to highlight CCJ clinical impact and push clinically useful journals to first page results. Since the new process resulted in a new product, the name warrants a change from Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) to Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). Therefore, the redesigned NLM Core Clinical Journals/AIM set from this point forward will be referred to as Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). The evidence-based process used to reframe evaluation of the clinical impact and utility of biomedical journals is documented in this article.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 3","pages":"665-676"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10361554/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9860203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: This follow-up study aims to determine if and how the coverage of funding information in Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) and Scopus changed from 2015 to 2021.
Methods: The number of all funded articles published in 2021 was identified in WoS and Scopus bibliographic databases using bibliometric analysis on a sample of 52 prestigious medical journals.
Results: The analysis of the number of funded articles with funding information showed statistically significant differences between Scopus and WoS due to substantial differences in the number of funded articles between some single journals.
Conclusion: Due to significant differences in the number of funded articles indexed in WoS and Scopus, which might be attributed to the different protocols for handling funding data in WoS and Scopus, we would still advise using both databases to obtain and analyze funding information.
目的:本后续研究旨在确定2015 - 2021年Web of Science Core Collection (WoS)和Scopus中资助信息的覆盖范围是否发生了变化,以及发生了怎样的变化。方法:采用文献计量学分析方法,在WoS和Scopus书目数据库中确定2021年发表的所有资助文章的数量。结果:对有资助信息的资助文章数量的分析显示,由于某些单一期刊之间的资助文章数量存在较大差异,Scopus与WoS的差异具有统计学意义。结论:由于在WoS和Scopus中检索的资助文章数量存在显著差异,这可能是由于WoS和Scopus中处理资助数据的协议不同所致,我们仍然建议使用这两个数据库来获取和分析资助信息。
{"title":"Discrepancies among Scopus and Web of Science, coverage of funding information in medical journal articles: a follow-up study.","authors":"Peter Kokol","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2023.1513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1513","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This follow-up study aims to determine if and how the coverage of funding information in Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) and Scopus changed from 2015 to 2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The number of all funded articles published in 2021 was identified in WoS and Scopus bibliographic databases using bibliometric analysis on a sample of 52 prestigious medical journals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis of the number of funded articles with funding information showed statistically significant differences between Scopus and WoS due to substantial differences in the number of funded articles between some single journals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Due to significant differences in the number of funded articles indexed in WoS and Scopus, which might be attributed to the different protocols for handling funding data in WoS and Scopus, we would still advise using both databases to obtain and analyze funding information.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"111 3","pages":"703-708"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10361553/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9854522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}