Research governance: implications for health library and information professionals

The Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care published by the Department of Health in 2001 provides a model of best practice and a framework for research in the health and social care sector. This article reviews the Department of Health Research Governance Framework, discusses the implications of research governance for library and information professionals undertaking research in the health- and social-care sector and recommends strategies for best practice within the information profession relating to research governance. The scope of the Framework document that covers both clinical and non-clinical research is outlined. Any research involving, amongst other issues, patients, NHS staff and use or access to NHS premises may require ethics committee approval. Particular reference is made to the roles, responsibilities and professional conduct and the systems needed to support effective research practice. Issues such as these combine to encourage the development of a quality research culture which supports best practice. Questions arise regarding the training and experience of researchers, and access to the necessary information and support. The use of the Framework to guide research practice complements the quality issues within the evidence-based practice movement and supports the ongoing development of a quality research culture. Recommendations are given in relation to the document's five domains of ethics, science, information, health and safety and finance and intellectual property. Practical recommendations are offered for incorporating research governance into research practice in ways which conform to the Framework's standards and which are particularly relevant for research practitioners in information science. Concluding comments support the use of the Research Governance Framework as a model for best practice.     

Evaluating information skills training in health libraries: a systematic review

Introduction: Systematic reviews have shown that there is limited evidence to demonstrate that the information literacy training health librarians provide is effective in improving clinicians’ information skills or has an impact on patient care. Studies lack measures which demonstrate validity and reliability in evaluating the impact of training. Aim: To determine what measures have been used; the extent to which they are valid and reliable; to provide guidance for health librarians who wish to evaluate the impact of their information skills training. Methods: Data sources: Systematic review methodology involved searching seven databases, and personal files. Study selection: Studies were included if they were about information skills training, used an objective measure to assess outcomes, and occurred in a health setting. Results: Fifty‐four studies were included in the review. Most outcome measures used in the studies were not tested for the key criteria of validity and reliability. Three tested for validity and reliability are described in more detail. Conclusions: Selecting an appropriate measure to evaluate the impact of training is a key factor in carrying out any evaluation. This systematic review provides guidance to health librarians by highlighting measures used in various circumstances, and those that demonstrate validity and reliability.     

Evaluating e‐book platforms: Lessons from the e‐book accessibility audit

E‐books are a potential assistive technology, offering significant advantages over print books, and accessible materials are now a financial and legal necessity within UK academia. It is often difficult to find supplier information on accessibility, for example, whether files have been tagged for reading order or whether the interface has been tested with assistive technologies. Equally, library staff may lack confidence in identifying accessibility features, making it hard to promote them to students or demand them from suppliers. This article reports on a crowdsourced e‐book audit of 44 e‐book platforms that was undertaken by 33 UK universities during 2016. The research scored different platforms for a range of accessibility issues, and the resulting open data set is presented in a manner that can be interrogated by libraries looking for specific features. A key finding was that the platform can dramatically affect the accessibility of a publisher's content, making it important for publishers to work with suitable vendors to disseminate their publications.     

The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study

There is an increasing body of literature on the information specialist's role in supporting evidence-based health care. In particular, the information component in systematic reviews has received considerable attention in recent years. Information professionals have evolved from simply acting as 'evidence locators' and 'resource providers' to being quality literature filterers, critical appraisers, educators, disseminators, and even change managers. This paper describes ten possible roles for information professionals in the systematic review process, using a case study of a review of the health information needs of visually impaired people carried out by the Centre for Health Information Management Research (CHIMR) at the University of Sheffield. This health information review was undertaken entirely by a team of information professionals. The ten roles identified are: project leader, project manager, literature searcher, reference manager, document supplier, critical appraiser, data extractor, data synthesiser, report writer and disseminator. This review has also identified an eleventh possible role for information professionals; that of primary researcher. Finally, the implications for evidence-based health care and evidence-based health informatics are discussed.     

The Covid‐19 ‘infodemic’: a new front for information professionals

The virus, commonly known as COVID‐19 which emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, has spread in 213 countries, areas or territories around the globe, with nearly 144 683 deaths worldwide on 18 April 2020. In the wake of this pandemic, we have witnessed a massive infodemic with the public being bombarded with vast quantities of information, much of which is not scientifically correct. Fighting fake news is now the new front in the COVID‐19 battle. This regular feature comments on the role of health sciences librarians and information professionals in combating the COVID‐19 infodemic. To support their work, it draws attention to the myth busters, fact‐checkers and credible sources relating to COVID‐19. It also documents the guides that libraries have put together to help the general public, students and faculty recognise fake news.     

Unmet needs for health information: a literature review

相似文献   

The hospital library: access to information for rural health professionals

This article examines some recent literature about the low physician-population ratios in rural areas. In an attempt to discover those factors which seem to preclude successful health care delivery in rural areas, it discusses a definition of the city as the place where the maximum lines of communication converge. A new concept, the "invisible city," is proposed, and the health care community in the United States is seen as an example. The library of the rural hospital, then, is defined as the location of the rural health professional's primary entrance into his own invisible city by means of professional communication through the biomedical literature.     

Sources of information on adverse effects: a systematic review

Background: Systematic reviews can provide accurate and timely information on adverse effects. An essential part of the systematic review process is a thorough search of the literature. This often requires searching many different sources. However, it is unclear which sources are most effective at providing information on adverse effects. Objective: To identify and summarise studies that have evaluated sources of information on adverse effects. Methods: Studies were located by searching in 10 databases as well as by reference checking, hand searching, citation searching and contacting experts. Results: A total of 6218 citations were retrieved yielding 19 studies which met the inclusion criteria. The included studies tended to focus on the adverse effects of drug interventions and compare the relative value of different sources using the number of relevant references retrieved from searches of each source. However, few studies were conducted recently with a large sample of references. Conclusions: This review suggests that embase , Derwent Drug File, medline and industry submissions may potentially provide the greatest number of relevant references for information on adverse effects of drugs. However, a systematic evaluation of the current value of different sources of information for adverse effects is urgently required.     

Information needs of rural health professionals: a review of the literature

This review analyzes the existing research on the information needs of rural health professionals and relates it to the broader information-needs literature to establish whether the information needs of rural health professionals differ from those of other health professionals. The analysis of these studies indicates that rural health practitioners appear to have the same basic needs for patient-care information as their urban counterparts, and that both groups rely on colleagues and personal libraries as their main sources of information. Rural practitioners, however, tend to make less use of journals and online databases and ask fewer clinical questions; a difference that correlates with geographic and demographic factors. Rural practitioners experience pronounced barriers to information access including lack of time, isolation, inadequate library access, lack of equipment, lack of skills, costs, and inadequate Internet infrastructure. Outreach efforts to this group of underserved health professionals must be sustained to achieve equity in information access and to change information-seeking behaviors.     

A case study: planning a statewide information resource for health professionals: an evidence-based approach

Question:

What is the best approach for implementing a statewide electronic health library (eHL) to serve all health professionals in Minnesota?

Setting:

The research took place at the University of Minnesota Health Sciences Libraries.

Methods:

In January 2008, the authors began planning a statewide eHL for health professionals following the five-step process for evidence-based librarianship: formulating the question, finding the best evidence, appraising the evidence, assessing costs and benefits, and evaluating the effectiveness of resulting actions.

Main Results:

The authors identified best practices for developing a statewide eHL for health professionals relating to audience or population served, information resources, technology and access, funding model, and implementation and sustainability. They were compared to the mission of the eHL project to drive strategic directions by developing recommendations.

Conclusion:

EBL can guide the planning process for a statewide eHL, but findings must be tailored to the local environment to address information needs and ensure long-term sustainability.     

Effective e-learning for health professionals and students--barriers and their solutions. A systematic review of the literature--findings from the HeXL project

Introduction: In 2003/4 the Information Management Research Institute, Northumbria University, conducted a research project to identify the barriers to e‐learning for health professionals and students. The project also established possible ways to overcome these barriers. The North of England Workforce Development Confederation funded the project. Methodology: The project comprised a systematic review of the literature on barriers to and solutions/critical success factors for e‐learning in the health field. Fifty‐seven references were suitable for analysis. This review was supplemented by a questionnaire survey of learners and an interview study of learning providers to ensure that data identified from the literature were grounded in reality. Results: The main barriers are: requirement for change; costs; poorly designed packages; inadequate technology; lack of skills; need for a component of face‐to‐face teaching; time intensive nature of e‐learning; computer anxiety. A range of solutions can solve these barriers. The main solutions are: standardization; strategies; funding; integration of e‐learning into the curriculum; blended teaching; user friendly packages; access to technology; skills training; support; employers paying e‐learning costs; dedicated work time for e‐learning. Conclusions: The authors argue that librarians can play an important role in e‐learning: providing support and support materials; teaching information skills; managing and providing access to online information resources; producing their own e‐learning packages; assisting in the development of other packages.     

Achieving change through mutual development: supported online learning and the evolving roles of health and information professionals

Introduction: Major changes in health care, within an information‐ and technology‐rich age, are impacting significantly on health professionals and upon their education and training. Health information professionals—in both the National Health Service (NHS) and higher education (HE) contexts—are consequently developing their roles, skills and partnerships to meet the needs of flexible education and training. This article explores one facet of this—supported online learning and its impact on role development. Methodology: A case study approach was taken, aiming to explore how academics, health information professionals and learning technologists are developing supported online learning to explicitly address the e‐literacy and information needs of health students within the context of NHS frameworks for education. This was contextualized by a literature review. Results: The case study explores and discusses three dynamics—(i) The use of supported online learning tools by future health‐care professionals throughout their professional training to ensure they have the appropriate e‐literacy skills; (ii) the use of supported online learning by current health professionals to enable them to adapt to the changing environment; (iii) the development of the health information professional, and particularly their role within multi‐disciplinary teams working with learning technologists and health professionals, to enable them to design and deliver supported online learning. Conclusions: The authors argue that, in this specific case study, health information professionals are key to the development of supported online learning. They are working successfully in collaboration and their roles are evolving to encompass learning and teaching activities in a wider context. There are consequently several lessons to be drawn in relation to professional education and role development.