基于证据的图书馆学:概述。

J D Eldredge
{"title":"基于证据的图书馆学:概述。","authors":"J D Eldredge","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To demonstrate how the core characteristics of both evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based health care (EBHC) can be adapted to health sciences librarianship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Narrative review essay involving development of a conceptual framework. The author describes the central features of EBM and EBHC. Following each description of a central feature, the author then suggests ways that this feature applies to health sciences librarianship.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>First, the decision-making processes of EBM and EBHC are compatible with health sciences librarianship. Second, the EBM and EBHC values of favoring rigorously produced scientific evidence in decision making are congruent with the core values of librarianship. Third, the hierarchical levels of evidence can be applied to librarianship with some modifications. Library researchers currently favor descriptive-survey and case-study methods over systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, or other higher levels of evidence. The library literature nevertheless contains diverse examples of randomized controlled trials, controlled-comparison studies, and cohort studies conducted by health sciences librarians.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health sciences librarians are confronted with making many practical decisions. Evidence-based librarianship offers a decision-making framework, which integrates the best available research evidence. By employing this framework and the higher levels of research evidence it promotes, health sciences librarians can lay the foundation for more collaborative and scientific endeavors.</p>","PeriodicalId":72483,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC35250/pdf/i0025-7338-088-04-0289.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-based librarianship: an overview.\",\"authors\":\"J D Eldredge\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To demonstrate how the core characteristics of both evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based health care (EBHC) can be adapted to health sciences librarianship.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Narrative review essay involving development of a conceptual framework. The author describes the central features of EBM and EBHC. Following each description of a central feature, the author then suggests ways that this feature applies to health sciences librarianship.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>First, the decision-making processes of EBM and EBHC are compatible with health sciences librarianship. Second, the EBM and EBHC values of favoring rigorously produced scientific evidence in decision making are congruent with the core values of librarianship. Third, the hierarchical levels of evidence can be applied to librarianship with some modifications. Library researchers currently favor descriptive-survey and case-study methods over systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, or other higher levels of evidence. The library literature nevertheless contains diverse examples of randomized controlled trials, controlled-comparison studies, and cohort studies conducted by health sciences librarians.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health sciences librarians are confronted with making many practical decisions. Evidence-based librarianship offers a decision-making framework, which integrates the best available research evidence. By employing this framework and the higher levels of research evidence it promotes, health sciences librarians can lay the foundation for more collaborative and scientific endeavors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC35250/pdf/i0025-7338-088-04-0289.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:展示循证医学(EBM)和循证医疗(EBHC)的核心特征如何适应健康科学图书馆的工作。方法:叙述性评论文章,涉及概念框架的发展。作者描述了EBM和EBHC的中心特征。根据每一个中心特征的描述,作者提出了将这一特征应用于健康科学图书馆的方法。结果:首先,EBM和EBHC的决策过程与健康科学图书馆的管理是一致的。其次,在决策中支持严格生成的科学证据的EBM和EBHC价值观与图书馆学的核心价值观是一致的。第三,经过一些修改,证据的层级可以应用于图书馆工作。图书馆研究人员目前更喜欢描述性调查和案例研究方法,而不是系统综述、随机对照试验或其他更高水平的证据。然而,图书馆文献中包含了由健康科学图书馆员进行的随机对照试验、对照比较研究和队列研究的各种例子。结论:健康科学馆员面临许多实际决策。基于证据的图书馆学提供了一个决策框架,它整合了现有的最佳研究证据。通过采用这一框架及其促进的更高水平的研究证据,健康科学图书馆员可以为更多的合作和科学努力奠定基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evidence-based librarianship: an overview.

Objective: To demonstrate how the core characteristics of both evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based health care (EBHC) can be adapted to health sciences librarianship.

Method: Narrative review essay involving development of a conceptual framework. The author describes the central features of EBM and EBHC. Following each description of a central feature, the author then suggests ways that this feature applies to health sciences librarianship.

Results: First, the decision-making processes of EBM and EBHC are compatible with health sciences librarianship. Second, the EBM and EBHC values of favoring rigorously produced scientific evidence in decision making are congruent with the core values of librarianship. Third, the hierarchical levels of evidence can be applied to librarianship with some modifications. Library researchers currently favor descriptive-survey and case-study methods over systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, or other higher levels of evidence. The library literature nevertheless contains diverse examples of randomized controlled trials, controlled-comparison studies, and cohort studies conducted by health sciences librarians.

Conclusions: Health sciences librarians are confronted with making many practical decisions. Evidence-based librarianship offers a decision-making framework, which integrates the best available research evidence. By employing this framework and the higher levels of research evidence it promotes, health sciences librarians can lay the foundation for more collaborative and scientific endeavors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The President's Page Research methodology. FORTISSIMO! Binding. And Now For Something Completely Different
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1