24 research outputs found
Information Literacy Strategy Development: Study Prescribes Strategic Management Framework for Academic Institutions. A Review of: Corrall, Sheila.
No full textObjective – To examine the development of information literacy (IL) strategies in higher education by assessing content and presentation of IL strategy documentation, and to explore the application of corporate strategy concepts and techniques to IL strategy.Design – Comparative, multi-case study. Qualitative analysis.Setting – U.K. universities.Subjects – Twelve information literacy strategy documents from ten institutions.Methods – Google was searched for IL strategy documents (restricted to the ac.uk domain), the LISINFOLITERACY discussion list was queried, and the Web sites of all U.K. universities were searched for a total sample of 12 documents at 10 institutions. Results of the data capture were discussed in the context of the literature on strategic management.Main Results – Corporate strategy tools and techniques are extensive in the literature, trending toward an emphasis on holistic thinking and marketing concepts. Many themes identified in the documents were consistent with the literature. While the format and style varied, all documents emphasized the integration of IL into subject curricula. All stressed the need to build collaborative partnerships between library/information staff and academic staff.Significantly, many strategies aimed to reach the broader institution, although poor articulation undermined this ambitious goal. In three, IL intervention was intended for the whole university community. However, the target audience often was not well-defined. Seven of the IL strategies identified additional partnerships to effect change at the policy level. Another key theme was the adoption of recognized IL standards; seven proposed the SCONUL (1999) model. All strategies recognized the importance of learning outcomes; six stated them explicitly. Prominent was the integration of e-learning resources, namely online tutorials. Many strategies recognized the need for marketing and advocacy activities. Half considered professional or staff development issues, as supported in the literature. All strategies explained in detail the context of their IL proposals, citing external challenges (growth of digital information, employer demand), external evidence (official reports, benchmarking statements, studies), and internal evidence (stakeholder concerns, institutional strategies) to support the need for IL. The documents specified a range of teaching modes from informal reference desk encounters to strategic positioning in relation to the broader community. Half defined or described IL. Seven documents were labelled strategies, but many did not comply with content elements defined in the literature. Other features of the literature poorly represented in the documents included: the need for well articulated objectives, mission and vision statements, attendance to broader strategic issues,stakeholder analysis, and the prioritizing of IL activities with portfolio development. Only two had action plans. Seven documents were in the public domain. Conclusion – Information literacy is recognized as an essential competence for participation in higher education, the workplace and society, and information professionals have long promoted IL. In response to the changing information environment they have sought to formalize policies and strategies to embed IL institutionally, working collaboratively with key stakeholders in the process. In this study of strategic documentation from 10 U.K. universities, IL objectives were consistent although the format and style of documentation varied. The author concludes that one or more strategic management models or tools available could improve IL strategy development, consistency, and coherency. Most importantly, an overarching strategic management framework should be used to resolve ambiguity and inconsistency, improve articulation, and maximize the effectiveness of strategy documents, thus avoiding weaknesses identified in the study. As noted by the author, the library literature has progressed to include strategic management concepts evidenced, in part, by the number of libraries using Kaplan and Norton’s scorecard system. But improvements can be made: conforming to strategic planning norms could strengthen IL strategy. Elements of models from the public or private sectors might be tailored to meet the specific needs of IL strategies. Further research could identify suitable strategy models for IL development. The process of implementing IL strategy should also be considered in future research. The author notes it would be interesting to explore the relationship between IL strategies and other organizational strategies and to compare IL strategies inother sectors
Information Literacy Strategy Development: Study Prescribes Strategic Management Framework for Academic Institutions
No full textA Review of:
Corrall, Sheila. "Information Literacy Strategy Development in Higher Education: An Exploratory Study." International Journal of Information Management 28 (2008): 26-37.
Objective – To examine the development of information literacy (IL) strategies in higher education by assessing content and presentation of IL strategy documentation, and to explore the application of corporate strategy concepts and techniques to IL strategy.
Design – Comparative, multi-case study. Qualitative analysis.
Setting – U.K. universities.
Subjects – Twelve information literacy strategy documents from ten institutions.
Methods – Google was searched for IL strategy documents (restricted to the ac.uk domain), the LISINFOLITERACY discussion list was queried, and the Web sites of all U.K. universities were searched for a total sample of 12 documents at 10 institutions. Results of the data capture were discussed in the context of the literature on strategic management.
Main Results – Corporate strategy tools and techniques are extensive in the literature, trending toward an emphasis on holistic thinking and marketing concepts. Many themes identified in the documents were consistent with the literature. While the format and style varied, all documents emphasized the integration of IL into subject curricula. All stressed the need to build collaborative partnerships between library/information staff and academic staff. Significantly, many strategies aimed to reach the broader institution, although poor articulation undermined this ambitious goal. In three, IL intervention was intended for the whole university community. However, the target audience often was not well defined. Seven of the IL strategies identified additional partnerships to effect change at the policy level. Another key theme was the adoption of recognized IL standards; seven proposed the SCONUL (1999) model. All strategies recognized the importance of learning outcomes; six stated them explicitly. Prominent was the integration of e-learning resources, namely online tutorials. Many strategies recognized the need for marketing and advocacy activities. Half considered professional or staff development issues, as supported in the literature. All strategies explained in detail the context of their IL proposals, citing external challenges (growth of digital information, employer demand), external evidence (official reports, benchmarking statements, studies), and internal evidence (stakeholder concerns, institutional strategies) to support the need for IL. The documents specified a range of teaching modes from informal reference desk encounters to strategic positioning in relation to the broader community. Half defined or described IL. Seven documents were labelled strategies, but many did not comply with content elements defined in the literature. Other features of the literature poorly represented in the documents included: the need for well articulated objectives, mission and vision statements, attendance to broader strategic issues, stakeholder analysis, and the prioritizing of IL activities with portfolio development. Only two had action plans. Seven documents were in the public domain.
Conclusion – Information literacy is recognized as an essential competence for participation in higher education, the workplace and society, and information professionals have long promoted IL. In response to the changing information environment they have sought to formalize policies and strategies to embed IL institutionally, working collaboratively with key stakeholders in the process. In this study of strategic documentation from 10 U.K. universities, IL objectives were consistent although the format and style of documentation varied. The author concludes that one or more strategic management models or tools available could improve IL strategy development, consistency, and coherency. Most importantly, an overarching strategic management framework should be used to resolve ambiguity and inconsistency, improve articulation, and maximize the effectiveness of strategy documents, thus avoiding weaknesses identified in the study. As noted by the author, the library literature has progressed to include strategic management concepts evidenced, in part, by the number of libraries using Kaplan and Norton’s scorecard system. But improvements can be made: conforming to strategic planning norms could strengthen IL strategy. Elements of models from the public or private sectors might be tailored to meet the specific needs of IL strategies. Further research could identify suitable strategy models for IL development. The process of implementing IL strategy should also be considered in future research. The author notes it would be interesting to explore the relationship between IL strategies and other organizational strategies and to compare IL strategies in other sectors
Web Usability Policies/Standards/Guidelines Do Not Influence Practices at ARL Academic Libraries. A Review of: Chen, Yu‐Hui, Carol Anne Germain and Huahai Yang. “An Exploration into the Practices of Library Web Usability in ARL Academic Libraries.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60.5 (2009): 953‐68.
No full textObjective – To survey the current status of Web usability Policies/Standards/Guidelines (PSGs) found in academic libraries of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Researchers sought to investigate whether PSGs are in place, the levels of difficulty surrounding implementation, the impact of PSGs on design, testing, and resource allocation, and the relationship between ARL ranking and usability practice or PSGs.Design – Survey.Setting – North America.Subjects – Academic libraries of the ARL.Methods – An 18‐question survey consisting of multiple choice, Likert scale, and open‐ended questions was sent to all 113 ARL libraries in November 2007. Survey recipients were selected as the person in charge of Web site usability by visiting library Web sites and phone inquiry. The survey was concluded in January 2008 with a response rate of 74% (84 institutions). The researchers used t‐test to detect any difference in ARL library ranking between libraries with and without PSGs. Pair‐wise t‐tests were conducted to identify gaps in difficulty implementing PSGs. In addition, they used Pearson’s Correlation to investigate any significant correlations between variables such as ARL rank and resource allocation.Main Results – Of the 84 respondents, 34 (40%) have general library Web PSGs and 25 (30%) have specific usability PSGs; 41 (49%) have at least one type of in‐library PSG. Of the 43 (51%) libraries that do not have PSGs, 30 (36%) are at universities with institutional Web usability PSGs; 26 (87%) follow those guidelines. There was no statistically significant relationship between ARL ranking and PSG status (see Table 1). The authors asked about difficulty in implementing PSGs. Of the 32 libraries responding to a question about general library Web PSGs, most had slight or moderate difficulty. Twenty‐three libraries with specific usability PSGs identified difficulty levels; some had no difficulty, but a majority had moderate difficulty. For the 26 libraries using institutional Web usability PSGs, most had no or slight difficulty. Pair‐wise t‐tests showed that library Web usability PSGs were significantly more difficult to implement than university Web usability PSGs. Enforcement/agreement issues were reported as the primary difficulty in implementing in‐library PSGs. Technical issues and ambiguity were obstacles at the institutional level. More than half of the 84 libraries have Web advisory committees and about one third have usability committees or Web usability subcommittees. Several libraries answered that they have none of these committees, but indicated that they have some sort of ad hoc committee or user study group to address usability issues. Of the 84 respondents, 71 (85%) have conducted usability testing. Sixty‐two libraries (73.8%) rated usability testing as important, very important, or extremely important: the rate given for the importance of usability testing did not correlate with ARL ranking. Cited most often in open ended questioningwere the importance of iterative testing, library wide buy‐in, and staff and resource availability. Main web pages were tested most frequently. Fifty‐three libraries (74.6%) tested their lower level pages at least once. OPACs were tested the least often. The amount of testing was impacted neither by the existence of library Web PSGs nor usability PSGs. The top two testing methods were in‐person observation and think aloud protocol.Of the 84 libraries, 24 (28%) reported having staff dedicated to Web usability issues; twenty full‐time staff and four part‐time staff. There was a weak association between ARL ranking and hours worked by dedicated staff; no association existed for regular staff who take on Web responsibilities. Fifty‐one (60%) of libraries had regular staff whose duties included Web usability; forty‐six full‐time and five part‐time. Training did not correlate to amount of testing methods used. There was a weak link between ALR ranking and availability of resources and, the authors showed, more testing was done as resources increased. In response to a query about future Web usability plans, the focus was on usability testing and site redesign, with only three libraries planning to refine or establish usability PSGs.Conclusion – The authors hypothesized that “web usability PSGs would influence usability practice within libraries and other institutions” (953). The data show that PSGs do not influence practices. The authors conclude that there is no significant relationship between PSGs and testing practices or PSGs and the availability of resources. Likewise, ARL ranking had no effect on the establishment of usability PSGs. Most libraries are conducting usability testing, and there was a weak link between ARL ranking and availability of testing resources. Highlighted in the open‐ended questions is the lack of usability expertise among stakeholders. Workload, inadequate human resources, and lack of organizational cohesion are also cited as barriers to the adoption of Web usability PSGs. The authors speculate that Web professionals likely use their own working knowledge and internalized guidelines without having formal documentation. The authors further speculate that the difficulty related to creating mental models that adequately represent library tasks may hinder the use of formal usability PSGs. Additionally, libraries may not regard the lack of usability PSGs as a liability, especially in light of the lack of government mandates or standards. The authors recommend educational efforts for key players on the value of Web usability, support for hiring dedicated staff, and formal documentation to guide design practice. The authors plan to compare the collected PSGs in an upcoming project. Future research could focus on non‐ARL libraries, the relationship between PSGs and user experience, and Content Management System (CMS) usability characteristics
Some in Saskatchewan Find The Cochrane Library Useful after Promotion, Access and Training Efforts. A review of: Forbes, Dorothy, Christine Neilson, Janet Bangma, Jennifer Forbes, Daniel Fuller, and Shari Furniss. “Saskatchewan Residents’ Use of The Cochrane Library.” Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research 2.2 (2007).
No full textObjective – To evaluate the use of The Cochrane Library by librarians, health care providers and consumers in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. Design – Volunteer telephone interviews and surveys of training participants at multiple time points; usage statistics.Setting – Saskatchewan.Subjects – Ninety-four volunteers participated in the study. Participants were self-selected from approximately 300 health practitioners and 100 public library staff attending training sessions, located primarily in rural areas. The majority of public library staff who attended training sessions were not professional librarians, although 31.5% of the study participants were librarians. Nurses made up the next largest group (16.3%), followed by therapists (7.6%), library support staff (5.4%),pharmacists (4.3%), physicians (3.3%), other health care providers (20.7%), and other (9.8%). Most were 40-65 years of age (71.6%)and female (92.4%).Methods – Forty-six training sessions were provided upon request between October 2004 and December 2006. Attendees wereinvited to participate in the study. Telephone interviews were conducted at three, six, nine, and twelve months following training sessions. Demographic information and data on the use of andsatisfaction with The Cochrane Library were collected. Additionally, monthly statistics were tracked by Wiley-Blackwell for user sessions, number of searches, and the number of full-text articles and abstracts visited.Main Results – Telephone interviews revealed that 65.2% of participants had accessed The Cochrane Library at three months; 64.2% had at six months. At nine months access dropped to 45.2%. At twelve months only 27.4% of participants reported using the resource. Of those who used The Cochrane Library, 16.4% reported at the three month interview that it was not helpful. This number decreased at six months (11.6%), nine months (7.7%) and twelve months (11.8%). 57.5% of respondents claimed to have learned something from The Cochrane Library, although a few (11.1%)reported that the information found had no impact. Others reported that the knowledge gained confirmed their beliefs (26.1%)and/or helped in decision-making (32.6%). No time points were reported for the data collected about the use and helpfulness of information found in The Cochrane Library. Three-year data from Wiley-Blackwell showed that The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was most frequently accessed (abstracts=26,016; full texts=15,934). The Cochrane Central Register was accessed5,640 times and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects was accessed 1,612 times. Periods of low usage corresponded withsummer and Christmas breaks. The type of search strategy used was tracked; the authors note that an emphasis on MeSH during training between October 2004 and December 2006 corresponded with the higher number of MeSH searches during the same time period. Participants reported using The Cochrane Library in response topatron requests, to prepare educational materials, and to support health care policy and practice changes. Reasons for not using The Cochrane Library included lack of time, limited access to the Internet, forgetting how to find and use the Web site, and disappointment with the content.Conclusion – Since the fall of 2004, The Cochrane Library has been promoted and made available free of charge to all Saskatchewan residents. Usage fluctuates during the year, with less use during the summer and winter holidays; it is reasonable to presume that students use The Cochrane Library during the academic school year. Most telephone interviewees who used The Cochrane Library reported that it was somewhat to very helpful; this number increased slightly over time while the number of respondents who used the resource fell measurably over twelve months. In other words, those who continued to use The Cochrane Library over time were more likely to report a higher level of satisfaction with the resource. Interviews indicated how librarians used The Cochrane Library, why they do or do not use the resource, and their level of satisfaction. The study revealed less about how others, such as practitioners or consumers, use the resource. Based on the limits of the telephone interviews, follow-up studies should try to capture more detailed usage data to describe the attributes of those who do and do not use The Cochrane Library. The authors note that additional data collected through online surveys or the Wiley-Blackwell website could help determine how to sustain use of the resource
Web Usability Policies/Standards/Guidelines (PSGs) do not Influence Practices at ARL Academic Libraries
No full textTopic-specific Infobuttons Reduce Search Time but their Clinical Impact is Unclear
No full textA Review of:
Del Fiol, Guilherme, Peter J. Haug, James J. Cimino, Scott P. Narus, Chuck Norlin, and Joyce A. Mitchell. ‚Effectiveness of Topic-specific Infobuttons: A Randomized Controlled Trial.‛ Journal of the American Medical Information Association 15.6 (2008): 752-9.
Objective – To assess whether infobutton links that direct users to specific content topics (‚topic links‛) are more effective in answering clinical questions than links that direct users to general overview content (‚nonspecific links‛).
Design – Randomized control trial.
Setting – Intermountain Healthcare, an integrated system of 21 hospitals and over 120 outpatient clinics located in Utah and southeastern Idaho.
Subjects – Ninety clinicians and 3,729 infobutton sessions.
Methods – To ensure comparable group composition, subjects were paired and randomly allocated to the study groups. Clinicians in the intervention group had access to topic links, while those in the control group had access to nonspecific links. All subjects at Intermountain Healthcare use a Web-based electronic medical record system (EMR) called HELP2 Clinical Desktop with integrated infobutton links. An Infobutton Manager application defines the content topics and resources; in this case, Micromedex® (Thomson Healthcare, Englewood, CO) provided access to the topic links. The medication order entry module, the most popular of the outpatient modules, was selected to test the two configurations of infobuttons. A focus group of seven HELP2 users aided the researchers in determining the most salient topics to be displayed as a part of the intervention group\u27s user-interface. The study measured infobutton session duration, or time spent seeking information, the number of infobutton sessions conducted, and the outcome and impact of the information seeking. A post-session questionnaire displayed randomly in 30% of sessions measured outcome and impact. The study was conducted between May and November, 2007. This project was funded in part by the National Library of Medicine.
Main Results – Subjects in the intervention group spent 17.4% less time seeking information than those in the control group (35.5 seconds vs. 43 seconds, p = 0.008). The intervention group used infobuttons 20.5% more often (22 sessions vs. 17.5 sessions, p = 0.21) than those in the control group, a difference that was not statistically significant. Twenty-five subjects answered the post-session survey at least once for a total of 115 (9.9%) responses out of 1,161 possible sessions. The information seeking success rate was equally high in both groups (87.2% intervention vs. 89.4% control, p = .099). Subjects reported high positive clinical impact (i.e., decision enhancement or learning) in 62% of successful sessions. Subjects conveyed a moderate or high level of frustration in 80% of responses associated with unsuccessful sessions.
Conclusion – Topic links provide a slight advantage in the clinical decision-making process by reducing the amount of time spent searching. But while the session length difference between the control and intervention groups is statistically significant, it is less clear whether the difference is clinically meaningful. As previous studies have indicated, infobuttons are able to answer clinical medication questions with a high success rate. It is unclear whether topic links have a clinically significant impact, or rather, whether they are more effective than nonspecific links. The authors believe that the study results ‚should generalize to high-frequency, medication-related infobutton users in other institutions‛ (758)
Web Usability Policies/Standards/Guidelines (PSGs) do not Influence Practices at ARL Academic Libraries
No full textA Review of:
Chen, Yu-Hui, Carol Anne Germain and Huahai Yang. “An Exploration into the Practices of Library Web Usability in ARL Academic Libraries.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60.5 (2009): 953-68.
Objective – To survey the current status of Web usability Policies/Standards/Guidelines (PSGs) found in academic libraries of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Researchers sought to investigate whether PSGs are in place, the levels of difficulty surrounding implementation, the impact of PSGs on design, testing, and resource allocation, and the relationship between ARL ranking and usability practice or PSGs.
Design – Survey.
Setting – North America.
Subjects – Academic libraries of the ARL.
Methods – An 18-question survey consisting of multiple choice, Likert scale, and open-ended questions was sent to all 113 ARL libraries in November 2007. Survey recipients were selected as the person in charge of Web site usability by visiting library Web sites and phone inquiry. The survey was concluded in January 2008 with a response rate of 74% (84 institutions). The researchers used t-test to detect any difference in ARL library ranking between libraries with and without PSGs. Pair-wise t-tests were conducted to identify gaps in difficulty implementing PSGs. In addition, they used Pearson’s Correlation to investigate any significant correlations between variables such as ARL rank and resource allocation.
Main Results – Of the 84 respondents, 34 (40%) have general library Web PSGs and 25 (30%) have specific usability PSGs; 41 (49%) have at least one type of in-library PSG. Of the 43 (51%) libraries that do not have PSGs, 30 (36%) are at universities with institutional Web usability PSGs; 26 (87%) follow those guidelines. There was no statistically significant relationship between ARL ranking and PSG status (see Table 1).
The authors asked about difficulty in implementing PSGs. Of the 32 libraries responding to a question about general library Web PSGs, most had slight or moderate difficulty. Twenty-three libraries with specific usability PSGs identified difficulty levels; some had no difficulty, but a majority had moderate difficulty. For the 26 libraries using institutional Web usability PSGs, most had no or slight difficulty. Pair-wise t-tests showed that library Web usability PSGs were significantly more difficult to implement than university Web usability PSGs.
Enforcement/agreement issues were reported as the primary difficulty in implementing in-library PSGs. Technical issues and ambiguity were obstacles at the institutional level. More than half of the 84 libraries have Web advisory committees and about one third have usability committees or Web usability subcommittees. Several libraries answered that they have none of these committees, but indicated that they have some sort of ad hoc committee or user study group to address usability issues.
Of the 84 respondents, 71 (85%) have conducted usability testing. Sixty-two libraries (73.8%) rated usability testing as important, very important, or extremely important: the rate given for the importance of usability testing did not correlate with ARL ranking. Cited most often in open ended questioning
were the importance of iterative testing, library wide buy-in, and staff and resource availability. Main web pages were tested most
frequently. Fifty-three libraries (74.6%) tested their lower level pages at least once. OPACs were tested the least often. The amount of testing was impacted neither by the existence of library Web PSGs nor usability PSGs. The top two testing methods were in-person observation and think aloud protocol.
Of the 84 libraries, 24 (28%) reported having staff dedicated to Web usability issues; twenty full-time staff and four part-time staff. There was a weak association between ARL ranking and hours worked by dedicated staff; no association existed for regular staff who take on Web responsibilities. Fifty-one (60%) of libraries had regular staff whose duties included Web usability; forty-six full-time and five part-time. Training did not correlate to amount of testing methods used. There was a weak link between ALR ranking and availability of resources and, the authors showed, more testing was done as resources increased. In response to a query about future Web usability plans, the focus was on usability testing and site redesign, with only three libraries planning to refine or establish usability PSGs.
Conclusion – The authors hypothesized that “web usability PSGs would influence usability practice within libraries and other institutions” (953). The data show that PSGs do not influence practices. The authors conclude that there is no significant relationship between PSGs and testing practices or PSGs and the availability of resources. Likewise, ARL ranking had no effect on the establishment of usability PSGs. Most libraries are conducting usability testing, and there was a weak link between ARL ranking and availability of testing resources. Highlighted in the open-ended questions is the lack of usability expertise among stakeholders. Workload, inadequate human resources, and lack of organizational cohesion are also cited as barriers to the adoption of Web usability PSGs. The authors speculate that Web professionals likely use their own working knowledge and internalized guidelines without having formal documentation. The authors further speculate that the difficulty related to creating mental models that adequately represent library tasks may hinder the use of formal usability PSGs. Additionally, libraries may not regard the lack of usability PSGs as a liability, especially in light of the lack of government mandates or standards. The authors recommend educational efforts for key players on the value of Web usability, support for hiring dedicated staff, and formal documentation to guide design practice. The authors plan to compare the collected PSGs in an upcoming project. Future research could focus on non-ARL libraries, the relationship between PSGs and user experience, and Content Management System (CMS) usability characteristics
Topic-specific Infobuttons Reduce Search Time but their Clinical Impact is Unclear. A Review of: Del Fiol, Guilherme, Peter J. Haug, James J. Cimino, Scott P. Narus, Chuck Norlin, and Joyce A. Mitchell. ‚Effectiveness of Topic-specific Infobuttons: A Randomized Controlled Trial.‛ Journal of the American Medical Information Association 15.6 (2008): 752-9.
No full textObjective – To assess whether infobutton links that direct users to specific content topics (‚topic links‛) are more effective in answering clinical questions than links that direct users to general overview content (‚nonspecific links‛).Design – Randomized control trial.Setting – Intermountain Healthcare, an integrated system of 21 hospitals and over 120 outpatient clinics located in Utah and southeastern Idaho.Subjects – Ninety clinicians and 3,729 infobutton sessions.Methods – To ensure comparable group composition, subjects were paired and randomly allocated to the study groups. Clinicians in the intervention group had access to topic links, while those in the control group had access to nonspecific links. All subjects at Intermountain Healthcare use a Web-based electronic medical record system (EMR) called HELP2 Clinical Desktop with integrated infobutton links. An Infobutton Manager application defines the content topics and resources; in this case, Micromedex® (Thomson Healthcare, Englewood, CO) provided access to the topic links. The medication order entry module, the most popular of the outpatient modules, was selected to test the two configurations of infobuttons. A focus group of seven HELP2 users aided the researchers in determining the most salient topics to be displayed as a part of the intervention group's user-interface. The study measured infobutton session duration, or time spent seeking information, the number of infobutton sessions conducted, and the outcome and impact of the information seeking. A post-session questionnaire displayed randomly in 30% of sessions measured outcome and impact. The study was conducted between May and November, 2007. This project was funded in part by the National Library of Medicine.Main Results – Subjects in the intervention group spent 17.4% less time seeking information than those in the control group (35.5 seconds vs. 43 seconds, p = 0.008). The intervention group used infobuttons 20.5% more often (22 sessions vs. 17.5 sessions, p = 0.21) than those in the control group, a difference that was not statistically significant. Twenty-five subjects answered the post-session survey at least once for a total of 115 (9.9%) responses out of 1,161 possible sessions. The information seeking success rate was equally high in both groups (87.2% intervention vs. 89.4% control, p = .099). Subjects reported high positive clinical impact (i.e., decision enhancement or learning) in 62% of successful sessions. Subjects conveyed a moderate or high level of frustration in 80% of responses associated with unsuccessful sessions.Conclusion – Topic links provide a slight advantage in the clinical decision-making process by reducing the amount of time spent searching. But while the session length difference between the control and intervention groups is statistically significant, it is less clear whether the difference is clinically meaningful. As previous studies have indicated, infobuttons are able to answer clinical medication questions with a high success rate. It is unclear whether topic links have a clinically significant impact, or rather, whether they are more effective than nonspecific links. The authors believe that the study results ‚should generalize to high-frequency, medication-related infobutton users in other institutions‛ (758)
Clinical Practice Guidelines: Mapping Collaborative Effort
No full textPoster presented at the quint-chapter Medical Library Association meeting, in Denver, October 2014
Some in Saskatchewan Find The Cochrane Library Useful after Promotion, Access and Training Efforts
No full textA review of:
Forbes, Dorothy, Christine Neilson, Janet Bangma, Jennifer Forbes, Daniel Fuller, and Shari Furniss. “Saskatchewan Residents’ Use of The Cochrane Library.” Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research 2.2 (2007).
Objective – To evaluate the use of The Cochrane Library by librarians, health care providers and consumers in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan.
Design – Volunteer telephone interviews and surveys of training participants at multiple time points; usage statistics.
Setting – Saskatchewan.
Subjects – Ninety-four volunteers participated in the study. Participants were self-selected from approximately 300 health practitioners and 100 public library staff attending training sessions, located primarily in rural areas. The majority of public library staff who attended training sessions were not professional librarians, although 31.5% of the study participants were librarians. Nurses made up the next largest group (16.3%), followed by therapists (7.6%), library support staff (5.4%), pharmacists (4.3%), physicians (3.3%), other health care providers (20.7%), and other (9.8%). Most were 40-65 years of age (71.6%) and female (92.4%).
Methods – Forty-six training sessions were provided upon request between October 2004 and December 2006. Attendees were invited to participate in the study. Telephone interviews were conducted at three, six, nine, and twelve months following training sessions. Demographic information and data on the use of and satisfaction with The Cochrane Library were collected. Additionally, monthly statistics were tracked by Wiley-Blackwell for user sessions, number of searches, and the number of full-text articles and abstracts visited.
Main Results – Telephone interviews revealed that 65.2% of participants had accessed The Cochrane Library at three months; 64.2% had at six months. At nine months access dropped to 45.2%. At twelve months only 27.4% of participants reported using the resource. Of those who used The Cochrane Library, 16.4% reported at the three-month interview that it was not helpful. This number decreased at six months (11.6%), nine months (7.7%) and twelve months (11.8%). 57.5% of respondents claimed to have learned something from The Cochrane Library, although a few (11.1%) reported that the information found had no impact. Others reported that the knowledge gained confirmed their beliefs (26.1%) and/or helped in decision-making (32.6%). No time points were reported for the data collected about the use and helpfulness of information found in The Cochrane Library. Three-year data from Wiley-Blackwell showed that The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was most frequently accessed (abstracts=26,016; full texts=15,934). The Cochrane Central Register was accessed 5,640 times and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects was accessed 1,612 times. Periods of low usage corresponded with summer and Christmas breaks. The type of search strategy used was tracked; the authors note that an emphasis on MeSH during training between October 2004 and December 2006 corresponded with the higher number of MeSH searches during the same time period. Participants reported using The Cochrane Library in response to patron requests, to prepare educational materials, and to support health care policy and practice changes. Reasons for not using The Cochrane Library included lack of time, limited access to the Internet, forgetting how to find and use the Web site, and disappointment with the content.
Conclusion – Since the fall of 2004, The Cochrane Library has been promoted and made available free of charge to all Saskatchewan residents. Usage fluctuates during the year, with less use during the summer and winter holidays; it is reasonable to presume that students use The Cochrane Library during the academic school year. Most telephone interviewees who used The Cochrane Library reported that it was somewhat to very helpful; this number increased slightly over time while the number of respondents who used the resource fell measurably over twelve months. In other words, those who continued to use The Cochrane Library over time were more likely to report a higher level of satisfaction with the resource. Interviews indicated how librarians used The Cochrane Library, why they do or do not use the resource, and their level of satisfaction. The study revealed less about how others, such as practitioners or consumers, use the resource. Based on the limits of the telephone interviews, follow-up studies should try to capture more detailed usage data to describe the attributes of those who do and do not use The Cochrane Library. The authors note that additional data collected through online surveys or the Wiley-Blackwell website could help determine how to sustain use of the resource
