Useful section on most common reasons why searches were rejected - could be part of a checklist for when we're doing peer review. Added to Evidence Wiki.
Patient-facing vaccination literature had a Flesch Reading Ease score of 58.4 and a Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level of 8.1, in comparison with poorer readability scores for healthcare professional literature of 30.7 and 12.6, respectively. MMR scientific abstracts had the poorest readability (24.0 and 14.8, respectively). Sentence structure was also considered, where better readability metrics were correlated with significantly lower number of words per sentence and less syllables per word.
Living systematic reviews (LSRs) are an increasingly common approach to keeping reviews up to date, in which new relevant studies are incorporated as they become available, so as to inform healthcare policy and practice in a timely manner. While journal publishers have been exploring the publication of LSRs using different updating and publishing approaches, readers cannot currently assess if the evidence underpinning a published LSR is up to date, as neither the search details, the selection process, nor the list of identified studies is made available between the publication of updates. We describe a new method to transparently report the living evidence surveillance process that occurs between published LSR versions.
This paper outlines recent progress in developing accredited continuing professional development opportunities for NHS knowledge and library specialists with a focus on the development of digital and data skills.
The Health and Care Act 2022 and concurrent reforms to the public health system have introduced a range of changes and some simplifications to the landscape of national bodies in the health and care system.
Here, we explain the core functions of the national bodies with the most significant role in setting policy for and shaping the operation of the health and care system. We also look at how these organisations are held accountable for carrying out those functions and the extent to which central government can direct them.
A growing body of research demonstrates that adapting the popular entertainment activity “escape rooms” for educational purposes as an innovative teaching method can improve the learning experience. Escape rooms promote teamwork, encourage analytical thinking, and improve problem solving. Despite the increasing development and use of escape rooms in health sciences programs and academic libraries, there is little literature on the use of this method in health sciences libraries with health professions students.
Conclusions: For SRs on SMT, we recommend using the combination suggested by the Cochrane Handbook of Cochrane Library, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and in addition, PEDro and Index to Chiropractic Literature. Google Scholar might be used additionally as a tool for searching gray literature and quality assurance.
Conclusion: Innovations by libraries during the early stages of the pandemic are having a long-term impact on library culture and the delivery of services. Even as libraries returned to in-person services, elements of telecommuting,
Results: A total of 209 reviews were found and analyzed. Of these, 28% had a librarian co-author, 41% named a librarian in the acknowledgements section, and 78% mentioned the contribution of a librarian within the body of the review. However, mentions of a librarian within the review were often generic (“a librarian”) and in 31% of all reviews analyzed no librarian was specified by name. In 9% of the reviews, there was no reference to a librarian found at all.
Conclusions: Even among this set of reviews, where librarian involvement was specified at the protocol level, librarians’ contributions were often described with minimal, or even no, language in the final published review. Much room for improvement appears to remain in terms of how librarians’ work is documented.
Two health sciences librarians created search strategies for these questions and searched eleven databases. Both the librarians and the six participants evaluated the search results using a rubric based on PICO to assess extent of alignment between the librarians’ and requestors’ relevance judgments. Intervention, Outcome, and Assessment Method constituted the most frequent bases for assessments of relevance by both librarians and participants. The librarians were more restrictive in all of their assessments except in a preliminary search yielding twelve citations without abstracts. The study’s results could be used to identify effective techniques for reference interviewing, selecting databases, and weeding search results.
Conclusion: The deliberate inclusion of a health sciences librarian into the doctor of pharmacy curriculum can benefit faculty and students. Opportunities for collaboration are available throughout the curriculum, such as providing instruction for database utilization and supporting the research activities of both faculty and student pharmacists.
The FAC (Focus, Amplify, Compose) rubric for assessing medical students’ question formulation skills normally accompanies our Evidence Based Practice (EBP) training. The combined training and assessment rubric have improved student scores significantly. How much does the rubric itself contribute to improved student scores? This study sought to measure student improvement using the rubric either with or without a linked 25-minute training session. To read the full article, choose Open Athens “Institutional Login” and search for “Midlands Partnership”.
This article describes how the library evidence team became part of a wider board project to develop a governance system for Apps. It also describes how the skills of librarians can be developed to work in this area and raise the profile of the team within the board.