Diverse collaborative ventures have enhanced medical article quality and reach, and opportunities for partnerships are more available than ever. Nevertheless, Wikipedia’s medical content and community still face significant challenges, and a socioecological model is used to structure specific recommendations. We propose that the medical community should prioritise the accuracy of biomedical information in the world’s most consulted encyclopaedia.
Healthwatch Shropshire has welcomed the creation of the NHS Digital Apps Library that will help people find the best quality apps to use. The NHS tests apps and awards an ‘NHS approved’ stamp if they meet quality standards for clinical effectiveness, safety, usability and accessibility.
The slide deck from the recent Health Literacy Skills and Partnership Working for Public and Health Librarians (Health Libraries Group and Public and Mobile Libraries Group joint event) are now available here.
The BMJ published an investigation into the prevalence and impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials included in Cochrane systematic reviews in 2010.1 It concluded that studies should not be excluded from reviews on the basis that there was “no relevant outcome data” (NROD) as failure to report review outcomes does not mean that the outcomes were not measured. Moreover, this recommendation is an expected methodological standard for Cochrane intervention reviews.2 Quality assurance screening of reviews by the Cochrane Editorial Unit has found that reviews still exclude studies on the basis of NROD. We investigated the proportion of Cochrane reviews excluding studies on the basis of NROD and whether the proportion …...To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.
A doctor who tried to submit for publication two research papers written by others has been suspended for 12 months by a medical practitioners tribunal. To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.
Health care library and knowledge services (LKS) are now expected to contribute to the provision of Patient and Public Information (PPI). The challenges of an ageing population, prevalence of long-term conditions and the encouragement of patients to self manage give added impetus. The Knowledge for Health care PPI Task and Finish Groups developed strategic partnerships with national organizations and produced a suite of resources to support LKS staff. Outputs include guidance, workshop materials, an Ideas Bank and Guide to NHS Choices. The work of the PPI Task and Finish groups will continue to support staff as they develop activities and evidence its impact.
Public Health England plays a vital role in ensuring the health of the nation. The Knowledge and Library Service (KLS) is a key part of the organisation's evidence supply chain. KLS staff handle over 200 requests for literature searches per annum, and this number is increasing exponentially year on year. Searches are often complex and require specialist public health knowledge to complete effectively. Library staff who are new to the area of public health require support and training. In this article, Anh Tran, Knowledge and Evidence Specialist for Public Health England, discusses a peer supported literature search training course that has been developed in-house for the benefit of new library staff, and to increase the Knowledge and Library Service's literature searching capacity at Public Health England.
We have updated our Literature Searching Sites web page to include resources that you can use to find grey literature. You'll find links to help you to find reviews, guidelines, reports, clinical trials, and theses. You'll also find links to specific grey literature databases.
Findings suggest that decisionmakers are willing to accept some trade-off in validity in exchange for a rapid review. Nevertheless, they expect the validity of rapid reviews to come close to that of systematic reviews.
It is estimated that in many settings nurses provide 80 per cent of patient care and they are often the clinicians leading the way in utilising new technology, and creating innovative ways of improving care using new digital tools.
NHS Digital exists to improve health and social care in England by making better use of technology, data and information.
We hope to start a Trust book club for anyone who is interested. We will read a different book each quarter, covering a range of titles on clinical and working life as chosen by the group. We are thinking of choosing non-fiction books rather than novels. Anyone is welcome and you don’t need to be a clinician or a manager to come along.
The journal club will be held on the second Friday of the month beginning Friday 8th September in the Library Seminar room from 1-1.45pm. We encourage you to bring your lunch!!
Although likely to be primarily of interest to nurses/HCA’s/ODPs/students/aspiring nurses etc, all staff are welcome. Topics will vary and participants are encouraged to suggest ideas for papers for future sessions. Details of papers will be publicised ahead of sessions on Twitter/Facebook/email etc and can be found at U:\Group\Evidence Updates for Healthcare Professionals (Green Folders)\Articles for journal club. If you cannot access this please contact the library for copies.
Recently, a search filter was published in the Health Information and Libraries Journal by Lynda Ayiku et al of NICE that attempts to locate any articles that are about UK research, populations or practice in Medline, and exclude others.
The search filter is validated, meaning it has been tested against a gold standard set of references to make sure it works. The full search filter was designed for the Ovid version of Medline, but unfortunately does not work properly in the HDAS interface used by the NHS. However, there is a simplified version available, which we have adapted for use in the HDAS interface, and this can be copied and pasted into the search box on HDAS, and then combined with your subject search (uisng ‘and’) to filter your search to UK articles only.
The KConnect output is virtually ready for Trip to use and it will allow us (with decent, but not perfect accuracy) the following elements from a RCT or systematic review:
P – population/disease
I – intervention
C – comparison (if there is one)
Sentiment – does the trial favour the intervention or not
Sample size – is this a large or small trial
Risk of Bias – via RobotReviewer