This paper aims to explore how the term “mental health literacy” (MHL) is defined and understand the implications for public mental health and educational interventions. To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
Current scales are often lengthy and redundant, leading to exhaustion and response burden. The goal is to use machine learning techniques, specifically item-reduction methods and selection algorithms, to develop shorter and more efficient scales. To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
The aim of this study was to assess the ChatGPT-4 (ChatGPT) large language model (LLM) on tasks relevant to community pharmacy. To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
Social science researchers continue to choose scoping reviews as a means of synthesizing the literature in their field, though search reporting is inconsistent. Many projects could benefit from the application of tools such as PRISMA-S, use of supplementary search strategies, and support of an LIS professional. Open Access
'Searchsmart.org is a free website that guides researchers to particularly suitable search options for their particular disciplines, offering a wide array of resources, including search engines, aggregators, journal platforms, repositories, clinical trials databases, bibliographic databases, and digital libraries. Search Smart currently evaluates the coverage and functionality of more than a hundred leading scholarly databases, including most major multidisciplinary databases and many that are discipline-specific'
The application-based evaluation model integrates BDA in health sciences libraries for improving library services and performance. The study proposed a need for skilled professionals with the knowledge and experience both professionally and technically.
he review revealed that the policies could be grouped into several key categories: educational programs, laws and regulations, knowledge sharing, national programs, and different information sources. The development of these policies involved multifaceted processes influenced by political, scientific, economic, cultural and social factors, as well as the involvement of multiple stakeholders.
Case presentation: This case compares two biomedical databases, Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed, to see if either is reliable enough to confidently recommend to students for use when writing papers. A total of 60 citations were assessed, 30 citations from each citation generator, based on the top 30 articles in PubMed from 2010 to 2020.
Conclusions: Error rates were higher in Ovid MEDLINE than PubMed but neither database platform provided error-free references. The auto-cite tools were not reliable. Zero of the 60 citations examined were 100% correct. Librarians should continue to advise students not to rely solely upon citation generators in these biomedical databases.
Description of a game where nursing students work in groups to come up with a question that they can challenge the librarian to answer (and explain how to search at the same time).
"We are refreshing our reminiscence collection, looking to create resources from more recent decades, e.g. focusing more on 1970s-90s." This was a suggestion from the OT students we hosted.
'While this is a promising area of development, AI-based evidence synthesis tools should not be
considered a ‘panacea’ or ‘cure all’ for the pressures imposed by an ever-expanding evidence base.
Given potential trade-offs, and a lack of information on unintended consequences, it is important that tools aren’t applied uncritically to resolve workload pressures'
“Our conversations with CILIP and attending the CILIP conference, is about helping make as many librarians as possible aware of the YouTube health initiative, and the credible health information available on the platform. And also that YouTube is a place you should feel comfortable directing your library visitors to for health information.” News release from CILIP - worth being aware of for patient information?
Key findings highlight Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Semantic Scholar, and Lens as leading options for FWC searching, with Lens providing superior download capabilities. For BWC searching, the Web of Science Core Collection can be recommended over Scopus for accuracy. BWC information from publisher databases such as IEEE Xplore or ScienceDirect was generally found to be the most accurate, yet only available for a limited number of articles
Editorial. Digital platforms and artificial intelligence's (AI) influence on our daily lives often go unnoticed. From the algorithms that support our smartphones and driverless vehicles to the medical diagnostic systems used by health professionals, AI is increasingly taking over decision-making tasks traditionally performed by humans. While enhancing human efficiency, this shift also introduces a myriad of ethical and legal uncertainties that demand our attention.
Free Access Article
his study aimed to examine health information seeking attitudes and behaviors in an academic-based employee wellness program before and after health literacy workshops were developed and facilitated by an academic health sciences librarian.
To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
Given the vast quantity of literature available, a key challenge of conducting rapid evidence syntheses is the time and effort required to manually screen large search results sets to identify and include all studies relevant to the research question within an accelerated timeline. To overcome this challenge, the NCCMT investigated the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the title and abstract screening stage of the rapid review process to expedite the identification of studies relevant to the research question.
To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
This study aimed to establish quality criteria to assist patients, caregivers, and the public in evaluating the reliability of online health information.
T. Morishita, and M. Stiavelli. (2022)cite arxiv:2207.11671Comment: Submitted to ApJ. Best-fit templates of our four galaxies will be published at https://github.com/mtakahiro.
R. Naidu, P. Oesch, P. van Dokkum, E. Nelson, K. Suess, K. Whitaker, N. Allen, R. Bezanson, R. Bouwens, G. Brammer and 14 other author(s). (2022)cite arxiv:2207.09434Comment: Submitted to ApJL. Figs. 1 and 2 summarize the candidates, Fig. 3 places the brightness of these systems in context, Fig. 4 shows the morphology, Fig. 5 explores implications for the UVLF. Comments warmly welcomed.
L. Böss, U. Steinwandel, K. Dolag, and H. Lesch. (2022)cite arxiv:2207.05087Comment: 25 pages (21 main paper + 4 appendix), 17 figures. Submitted to MNRAS.
I. Williams, A. Khan, and M. McQuinn. (2022)cite arxiv:2207.05233Comment: 23 pages, 10 figures, public python code at https://github.com/ianw89/cgm-brush.
M. Golubchik, L. Furtak, A. Meena, and A. Zitrin. (2022)cite arxiv:2207.05007Comment: 9 pages; 6 figures; 1 table; to be submitted; comments welcome.\\ a) https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2022/nasa-shares-list-of-cosmic-targets-for-webb-telescope-s-first-images\\ b) https://www.dropbox.com/sh/svc84qmnlh05lmc/AABFQs_0VXE6Fh8jWbAgh4sza?dl=0.
Y. Izotov, J. Chisholm, G. Worseck, N. Guseva, D. Schaerer, and J. Prochaska. (2022)cite arxiv:2207.04483Comment: 19 pages, 11 figures, accepted for publication in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2103.01514.
J. Bernal, and E. Kovetz. (2022)cite arxiv:2206.15377Comment: 9 figures, 40 pages + references; invited by The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review. Comments are welcome. Accompanied by an update of the lim package at https://github.com/jl-bernal/lim.
T. Collaboration, A. Price-Whelan, P. Lim, N. Earl, N. Starkman, L. Bradley, D. Shupe, A. Patil, L. Corrales, C. Brasseur and 126 other author(s). (2022)cite arxiv:2206.14220Comment: 43 pages, 5 figures. To appear in ApJ. The author list has two parts: the authors that made significant contributions to the writing and/or coordination of the paper, followed by maintainers of and contributors to the Astropy Project. The position in the author list does not correspond to contributions to the Astropy Project as a whole.
J. Newman, and D. Gruen. (2022)cite arxiv:2206.13633Comment: Posted with permission from the Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Volume 60, copyright 2022 Annual Reviews, http://www.annualreviews.org/.