Business information sources for health sciences librarians.

As the health care industry becomes more business oriented, health sciences librarians will encounter more patrons seeking business information. Administrators and managers of health care facilities are primarily in need of business information. This paper discusses those resources with which health sciences librarians must be familiar to successfully meet the challenges of these new demands. It identifies traditional and online sources, and emphasizes business sources geared to the health care industry. The business managers of the health care facility represent a new patron market for the health sciences librarian.     

Charting a path for health sciences librarians in an integrated information environment

[This corrects the article on p. 421 in vol. 81.].     

Medical information, health sciences librarians, and professional liability

As a gatekeeper to medical literature and a critical link in the delivery of information to physicians, the librarian's role raises the issue of the librarian's professional liability. The paper suggests several ways in which liability may attach to the librarian or the librarian's employers. Although the librarian's personal risk is negligible, the physician's exposure due to ineffective library work is substantial since the courts have held that a physician must keep abreast of progress in his field. Librarians can also become associated with professional liability actions as part of a case against a physician or hospital through the legal doctrine of vicarious liability. The paper concludes by suggesting several proactive steps for health sciences librarians to pursue to insulate themselves from professional liability and to insulate physicians and institutions from vicarious liability.     

Inside outreach: a challenge for health sciences librarians.

OBJECTIVE: Like medical and health sciences libraries throughout the country, the Lamar Soutter Library (LSL) at the University of Massachusetts Medical School is dealing with ever-increasing outreach needs in times of diminishing funding. With the goal of reshaping the library's outreach program to better serve our patron groups, the Outreach Study Group was formed to investigate existing models of outreach. METHODS: The group initially examined the current literature and subsequently conducted a nationwide survey of medical and health sciences libraries to identify trends in outreach. This article details the methods used for the survey, including establishing criteria for selecting participants, determining the focus, and developing and conducting the survey. RESULTS: Of the 40 libraries invited to participate, 63% completed the survey. An analysis of the data revealed successes, problems, and trends. The group's conclusions led to recommendations for the LSL's future outreach efforts. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the data revealed key findings in the areas of strategic planning, funding, and evaluation. A thoughtful definition of outreach ensures that outreach activities are expressions of the library's mission. Funding shifts require flexible programs. Evaluation provides data necessary to create new programs, sustain successful ones, and avoid repeating mistakes.     

Qualifications sought by employers of health sciences librarians, 1986

Two hundred ninety-four job advertisements that appeared in MLA News in 1986 were analyzed to determine whether MLA certification had become a more frequent requirement than it was at the time of Schmidt and Swanton's 1980 study. Other qualifications studied were subject background, health sciences library courses, online searching experience, and OCLC experience. Library experience, educational requirements, and geographic distribution were also included.     

Authorship outlets of academic health sciences librarians.

Journal articles are the most common publication format for U.S. academic health sciences librarians. This is consistent with the findings of other researchers. Of the total publications in this study, 68% were in journals. Watson found that 69% of the academic librarians' publications were published in some type of journal [8]. Similarly, Yerkey and Glogowski found that 67% of the publications in their study were journal articles, although their population consisted of all types of authors of library/information science materials [9]. Both the present study and Watson found that monographs were the second most common publication outlet. Watson found that 16% of the total publications were monographs; the current study identified 14.8% of the total publications as monographs [10]. Although Watson's findings are similar to the newer results, it is important to note that Watson's study was conducted in a different manner and included book reviews, which were not counted in the present study. The health sciences librarians in the present study published more than two thirds of their articles in library/information science journals and 27% in health sciences journals. Similarly, in Yerkey and Glogowski's study, the second-largest number of library/information science articles appeared in medical and health sciences journals [11]. Fang also found that 22.57% of the journal articles on health sciences librarianship or by health sciences librarians were in medical journals [12. This seems to demonstrate the desire of health sciences librarians to communicate with the health professionals. Yerkey and Glogowski that library and information science is an interdisciplinary field, "borrowing and supplying information to and from other disciplines"[13].     

Electronic publishing: implications for health sciences libraries and librarians

Increasingly we hear of "electronic publishing" in the form of books and journals made available as databases, either through traditional online services or through electronic message services. This paper explores its potential impact on the medical library community and on the relationship between end user and librarian. The librarian's new roles as intermediary, facilitator, and advocate for end users are examined. The question of developing expertise for evaluating information as well as facilitating access is addressed.     

Evidence-Based Practice: a new paradigm brings new opportunities for health sciences librarians

It is questionable whether the Evidence-Based Health Care model, whereby end users appraise all potentially pertinent information, is sustainable. A shift to an Evidence-Based Practice model, featuring a new medical knowledge base infrastructure facilitating rapid translation of clinical research into practice should be embraced. This shift would offer new opportunities for health sciences librarians. In this article, the authors: (1) review milestones in the evolution of the health sciences knowledge base; (2) review the evolution of the Evidence- Based Health Care/Practice model of health information utilization; and (3) discuss the significance and implications for health sciences librarians of trends towards an increasingly digital health information environment. The authors suggest new roles for health sciences librarians: partnering to integrate advanced information management technologies into the clinical enterprise and integration into the processes for developing these technologies.     

Data disaggregation: the case of Asian and Pacific Islander data and the role of health sciences librarians

Health disparities within Asian and Pacific Islander (API) communities are often masked due to aggregated data. Lack of adequate data limits required health care services for these communities. While moving forward toward health equity, it is critical that disparities for API communities are acknowledged and addressed. This article focuses on the issues of aggregated data for API communities followed by suggestions on how health sciences librarians can support and promote better practices for data disaggregation.     

Benchmarking participation of Canadian university health sciences librarians in systematic reviews

This study describes the current state of Canadian university health sciences librarians'' knowledge about, training needs for, and barriers to participating in systematic reviews (SRs). A convenience sample of Canadian librarians was surveyed. Over half of the librarians who had participated in SRs acknowledged participating in a traditional librarian role (e.g., search strategy developer); less than half indicated participating in any one nontraditional librarian role (e.g., data extractor). Lack of time and insufficient training were the most frequently reported barriers to participating in SRs. The findings provide a benchmark for tracking changes in Canadian university health sciences librarians'' participation in SRs.