• Save
Research in the Library: An Evidence-based Approach for Making Informed Decisions
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Research in the Library: An Evidence-based Approach for Making Informed Decisions

on

  • 1,018 views

Presented at the 2010 Library Search Seminar: Session 3B

Presented at the 2010 Library Search Seminar: Session 3B

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,018
Views on SlideShare
1,018
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Research in the Library: An Evidence-based Approach for Making Informed Decisions Research in the Library: An Evidence-based Approach for Making Informed Decisions Document Transcript

  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Research in the Library: An Evidence-based Approach for Making Informed Decisions Library Research Seminar-V Session 3B, Room 1105 Thursday, October 7, 2010 Framing the questions… …continuing the conversation Twitter #lrsv20103B SlideShare http://www.slideshare.net/doujou.DC Wiki http://evidence4lib.pbworks.com/ 1
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 The Research Imperative: The Research Policy Statement of the Medical Library Association Culture of Research Research Skills Set Domains of Research In memory of Jocelyn Rankin PhD, librarian & mentor Creating a Culture of Research: the Vision One important factor is having a leader at your library that is interested in research and helping others in the library become engaged in doing research. Betsy L. Humphreys, AHIP 2
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Creating the Health Information Knowledgebase: The Challenge The comment we sometimes hear is that I don’t have enough time to do research. “There is always time, it is the question of priorities.” Wayne J. Peay Domains of Research We need to be more active in publishing our research. “If it is interesting and valuable to you, you can almost guarantee that it will be interesting and valuable to someone else.” Ann McKibbon 3
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Research Skills Set Collaboration, research almost always involves other people. Claire J. Twose Start by collaborating with someone who has done research, start with a poster presentation, brief communication Deborah D. Blecic, AHIP The process of implementing a federated search system at the National Institutes of Health Library Anne White-Olson, Information & Education Services Branch Ben Hope, NIHL Information Architecture Branch Douglas Joubert, NIHL Information Architecture Branch DIVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES OFFICE OF RESEARCH SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 4
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Project Goals and Objectives  Find a meta-search product that would allow NIH staff to simultaneously search multiple resources  Establish a search interface that integrates library resources into the NIH Clinical Research Information Systems (CRIS)  Ascertain the needs and preferences of NIH staff in terms of searching for information online  Identify core functionality and ideal user interface design for the NIHL meta-search tool One search system deployed on 2 unique platforms NIH Library Clinical Center* The Clinical Center search interfaces exposes patient data; therefore, we are not able to show search results 5
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 About the search prototype  Developed by Tamas Doszkocs, Senior Computer Scientist at NLM.  Searches multiple, independent databases and clusters retrieval into subject categories.  Utilizes natural language process tools to access heterogeneous information sources on the open and deep web.  Includes spellchecker, automatic mapping to thesauri, concept clusters for focused drill down and query refinement. The Environment - NIH Library 2006 Two things were happening 1. Professional staff was taking a Qualitative Research Course 2. Staff was looking into implementing a Federated Search System Outcomes 1. Combined the two to develop a class project on looking at systems using qualitative research methods learned in class. 2. In 2009 completing the process implementing First Search at the NIHL 6
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Project Phases Phase 1 A qualitative approach using focus groups with six nurse specialists from the Department of Clinical Research Informatics was used. Phase2 The NIHL contracted with UserWorks, Inc. to conduct a usability study. Grounded Theory  Inductively build theories through successive levels of data analysis and conceptual development.  The theory evolves and changes as the researcher interacts with the data.  Methodology is inductive rather than deductive due to the “interplay with the data collected in actual research”.  Interplay is continuous and evolving Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. 7
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Our Focus Group CRIS Nurse Informaticians who provide user support, training and documentation for the NIH Clinical Research Information System Focus Group Methods (1) Participants were asked the following questions 1. What is your favorite web site and why? 2. When you search for information on the web, where do you go? 3. What resources do you use at the library? 8
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Focus Group Methods (2) The contents of interviews were transcribed and analyzed in ATLAS.ti according to the principles of grounded theory. Focus group activities included a discussion of meta- searching and a demonstration of the meta-search prototype. Additional discussion to elicit feedback from the participants concerning the preferred design and features of a meta- search search system. Focus Group Methods (3)  Focus group transcripts were loaded into ATLAS.ti v5.2.12 for analysis.  Content analysis is the systematic examination and interpretation of a primary document to identify themes and meanings. 9
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Focus Group Methods (4)  Independent group also developed codes using index cards.  After the first and second stages of organizing the codes into themes, a third researcher was brought in to resolve differences in organizing the codes into groups. Usability Methods (1)  The usability study compared the prototype to a number of meta-search platforms in an attempt to understand user performance, needs, and preferences of the proposed meta-search platform.  The usability study had 14 participants (4 male and 10 female), which included researchers, administrators, and NIHL staff. 10
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Usability Methods (2)  Each subject participated in a one-on-one interview and three user-performed tasks:  Find information on a specific topic  Locate a specific article  If time allowed, conduct a user-defined search Results – Focus Group 88 codes were generated from 114 quotations using the open coding technique, in which research team members grouped each line of discreet and meaningful text from the focus group transcript into conceptual units. The “Features” theme focused on the manipulation of search results and saving searches “Types of Resources” theme focused on the resources commonly used by these focus group participants, namely PubMed and CINAHL 11
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 16 themes generated from the codes Usability Grouped Categories Advanced search Search terms Search status and results Refining results Clustering Search Results Display Other Key Findings 12
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Advanced search  It was important to have an advanced search option to accommodate different users  Labels need to be clearly identified and use intuitive nomenclature (no library jargon)  Help needs be context-specific. Search terms  Increase the prominence of the “did you mean” spell check  Employ commonly used search inputs, such as quotation marks, the word “and,” semi-colons, and the plus sign 13
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Search status and results  Wanted a status bar to help them understand when the search was complete.  Preferred to wait and see all the results at once, rather than seeing the results by source. Refining results  Used and liked the refine results option  Function of “refine results” was not consistent across all platforms 14
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Search results display  Participants expected and wanted a summary abstract for journal articles  Participants wanted keywords in titles and abstract to be highlighted to determine whether a result was relevant Clustering  Participants thought that clustering was important; however, it needed to be refined:  Offer many layers to the clustering  Show consistent clusters  Show full subcategory cluster headings  Provide a means for narrowing by clustering without losing the primary cluster 15
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Other Key Findings  Right-handed content had limited use and interest  Several features were not heavily utilized  Category links  MeSH capability  Publication links  Sort and limit options OK, What Next?  Based on the findings from the usability study, the team developed a list of priorities for the developer  The list was further refined for both products 16
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Contact Us  Douglas J. Joubert, MS, MLIS National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301-594-6282 E-mail: joubertd@mail.nih.gov LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/douglasjoubert Twitter: http://twitter.com/doujouDC  Anne White-Olson, MLS National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301-451-5863 E-mail: whiteols@mail.nih.gov Visualize the Activity in the Library with Data Bradley Otterson, NIHL Information Architecture Branch Ben Hope, NIHL Information Architecture Branch DIVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES OFFICE OF RESEARCH SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 17
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Case Study  The NIHL was redesigned to make the facility reconfigurable and flexible.  To find the best way to use and arrange the space, we wanted to look at data based on usage and activity, but we didn’t know how to get it.  This case study explores the way we approached and solved this problem. 18
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Computer Zone • Study Carrels • Raised counter with stools • Laptop Chairs Visual Display with Numbers Numbers represent the times a chair or workstation was occupied during an observation period. A total of 71 observations took place during a single week. Each observation took about 10 minutes. Computer Window Zone Zone Media Zone Spine Zone Collaboration Zone Carrel Training Zone Zone Standing Computer Zone IESB Chair Zone Visual Display of Activity Zones Each color represents a distinct activity area of the library. 19
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Computer Zone Window Zone • Study Carrels with • Lounge Chairs PCs • Tables with Chairs • Raised counter • Browsing of New and stools with PCs Journals, • Laptop Chairs Newspapers, and Media Zone •Tables and Books •Chairs •Area for Receptions •TV with News Spine Zone •Tables with chairs •Browsing of New Books Training Room Collaboration •Tables and Zone Carrel Zone Chairs •Lounge Chairs •Study Carrels Standing Computer Zone •Stand-up Stations IESB Chair Zone •Lounge Chairs Visual Display of Activity Zones with Furniture Options Darker variations of red indicate higher levels of activity. Furniture within the zones range from lounge chairs to study carrels. Case Study  Background Information  Problem  Solution  Pilot Study  Study  Results  Analysis and Outcome  Lessons Learned  Next Steps 20
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Background Information  The library serves 18,000+ staff.  The library is located in the largest building on campus, and is the largest brick building in the world.  3.3 million square feet and over nine miles of corridors.  The library is in the hub of a large, sprawling campus. Background Information The redesign turned a room full of study carrels into an inviting space with a variety of moveable seating options and activity zones. Before After 21
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Background Information The redesign included transforming an outdoor slab of concrete into an inviting green roof terrace. Before After Problem How do we document the use of the library? The first attempt was to develop a paper-based system using maps of the library with activity zones. A team of nine library staff members walked through the library at designated time intervals noting the activity on the map. They put an X where people were sitting and a note about the patron’s activity. 22
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Problem The paper-based system created additional problems:  The data and notes from library staff were inconsistent. For example, some library staff members made extensive notes and other did not annotate anything.  It was difficult to mark, score, and tabulate the results. The error rate for entering the data from the printed maps into an Excel spreadsheet was high and the work was tedious. Solution (1)  Create a paperless system based on three requirements:  A touch screen laptop would allow library staff to easily record their observations of patron activity.  The laptop needed a map of the library with seating options that let library staff touch the screen where clients were sitting. A drop-down menu allowed for documenting the activity (e.g., reading, using a laptop, collaborating). 23
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Solution (2)  The data from the observations should be automatically captured and stored in a database. This would minimize errors and allow us to easily create a variety of reports and thematic maps to visualize the activity.  Built a system based on our requirements Finding the Right Software (1) 1. Checked for existing software or custom programming solutions – too expensive and no products matched our requirements 2. Found a form-creating software package that allowed form fields to be placed over a background image. The image was a map of the library with furniture and other aspects of the room done in Visio. Each piece of furniture was a field in the form. 24
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Finding the Right Software (2) 3. The software wasn’t designed for our purposes, but it included the ability to:  Create drop-down fields over furniture to record different activities  Integrate Visual Basic programming for customization and scripting  Directly export data to a SQL or Access database. 4. Used asp and a webpage to create a display of tallied data based on SQL query. This is a screenshot of the tool on the touch-screen laptop. The drop-down menu has the options for recording the activities. 25
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Pilot Study We asked for volunteers from all branches of the library to form a research team to conduct the study. A total of 27 (out of 47) staff members volunteered. Members were trained on how to use the laptop. They signed up for time slots for each hour the library was open during the week. They walked through the library noting the activity on the laptop. It took about 10 minutes for each scan. Pilot Study After the pilot study, the team met to discuss their experiences with conducting the observations. They reported problems with the software and gave suggestions for improving the outcome of study. Software Problem Suggestions  An error caused the last entry for  They wanted to clarify the drop- a chair to replicate into the next down options for activity. The time slot. This would have tainted final options were: the data.  Laptop  Laptop and Paperwork  Reading  Collaborating  Relaxing  Training 26
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Study  When the software problems were fixed and the suggestions were implemented, the team conducted the final study with the laptop for a one-week period.  After conducting the observations, the data was tabulated. We used Photoshop to create thematic maps and Excel to make charts. Results We created a series of thematic maps that showed where people were sitting. This is an example: Usage 27
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results A series of charts showed what people were doing. Here’s an example: Activities Laptop 1,169 people observed 9% Laptop + Papers 9% Library computers 43% Reading 14% Paperwork 7% Training 10% Collaboration Total 1,169 Relaxing 4% 4% Analysis and Outcome After analyzing the series of thematic maps and charts, the research team made suggestions for changing the layout of the room. The room was changed based on their recommendations. Here are two examples:  More PCs and carrels were added to the Computer Zone due to high usage. Laptop chairs were moved from the Computer Zone to another level of the library due to low usage.  Lounge chairs near the information desk were moved due to low usage. The unused chairs were moved to the entrance and to another level of the library. 28
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Top 5 Things Learned from the Case Study 1. Technology, innovation, and perseverance can help solve a problem. 2. We found out where the high and low usage areas were. 3. After we rearranged the room based on the team’s suggestions, we noticed that patrons are using the new arrangement more than the previous one. We want to do another study to find out if our new observations and changes are supported by the data. 4. The most-used chairs were the private study carrels. 5. It’s possible for a research team of 27 members not only to work together to get something done but to remain on speaking terms afterwards. Next Steps (1)  Add the terrace and downstairs to the maps for the next studies.  Do additional studies with the terrace, downstairs, and new configurations of the room.  Remove and/or purchase more furniture if future studies warrant.  Examine activity areas to make changes. 29
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Next Steps (2)  Improve the software so that results are calculated and displayed on the web in real-time.  Configure the database so that we can run different reports on activity in the entire library for comparative future studies.  Busiest times of day and week  Most popular activity and where  Most/least used options for chairs/workstations/areas Contact Us  Ben Hope National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301-594-6473 E-mail: TallGuy@nih.gov  Bradley Otterson National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301-496-2258 E-mail: Bradley.Otterson@nih.gov 30
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Disaster Information Needs: A Medical Librarian Perspective Alicia Livinski, Nancy Terry National Institutes of Health Library Alison Rollins, Linda Spitzer Learning Resource Center, Uniformed Services University DIVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES OFFICE OF RESEARCH SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Background  “Researchers learn their craft through a combination of trial and error, and getting their hands dirty with data.”*  Ours is a qualitative research project.  Our introduction to qualitative research was a class on Qualitative Research Methods in 2008.  Our research began as a class assignment. Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. 31
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Rationale  Collaborators in this study provide library services to groups in the US Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Department of Defense personnel (civilian and military).  People in these groups have previously deployed for a disaster or humanitarian emergency.  Idea for this research grew out of our work providing library services for them.  Small body of literature on information needs of disaster responders. Purpose  To determine the information needs of disaster and emergency response personnel within the Federal Government.  Identify information needs, formats, access challenges, and barriers, technology capabilities.  Learn how libraries can proactively provide information needed by response personnel when deployed in a disaster/emergency situation. 32
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Hypothesis  Information needs of disaster/emergency professionals before, during and after a response are significant and vary greatly in scope. Focus  What should librarians know to provide the best service to emergency and disaster responders?  About the user: Disaster responders  The operational environment “I don’t always have the cognitive  Delivering information process it takes to tease out the resources I have access to, or you  Resources used all have access to, so I am relying  Other challenges on you all resource librarians to help me find the information I need  Resource design for background information and for information support.” recommendations 33
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Methodology  Interviewed 12 public health & military personnel  Agencies represented by interviewees: 1 2 3 4  Interviewees had world-wide responder experience: 1. Faculty, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) 2. Center for Disaster & Humanitarian Medicine (CDHAM), USUHS 3. HHS, Office of the Secretary, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness & Response (ASPR) 4. HHS, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Surgeon General, Office of Civilian Volunteer Medical Reserve Corps (OCVMRC) Methodology  Interviewees were:  public health officials,  nurses,  physicians,  pharmacist,  faculty, &  government leaders 34
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Methodology  Semi- Structured Interviews  9-question survey used to explore:  Information used during response  Information needed/desired  Formats & delivery options  Information sources need in an ideal resource  Coded transcribed interviews  Identified themes  Categorized with a card sort Methodology  Limitations to our study:  Federal uniformed responders only (DoD & DHHS)  Recall bias of interviewees  Small # of interviewees  We also did not include responders to the January 2010 Haitian earthquake 35
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results "It's not until you hit the ground that you realize, 'What else do I need?” FEMA Wildfires Results: The users  Information needs differ during different stages:  Pre-deployment  Deployment  Planning  “Normal” duties & experience may not match crisis assignments  Personal & professional networks are essential 36
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Environment "during a disaster and being in the middle of it [...] being able to lay your hands on information instantaneously is usually what it is about." PhotoShare Flooding Results: Environment  Librarians should always consider their disaster-responder patrons’:  Physical Environment  Type of disaster/emergency  Location of disaster/emergency  Socio-Cultural Environment  Type of response: International, federal, state, UN  Players on the ground: NGOs, military, US, or other foreign governments It’s complicated! 37
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Environment  Challenges from their physical environment:  Electricity to power/re-charge devices  Unreliable & slow Internet service  Bandwidth restrictions  Not enough laptops for all  Email account size limits  Firewalls  Insufficient time to research - ready answers are key  Small screens (PDAs)  Printing not always possible  Weather Results: Environment  The socio-cultural environment:  Collaboration among all responding partners is key to prevent duplication, sharing of resources, ensuring coverage of affected populations  Respect for capability and decision-making role of “host” government  All those responding also need food, clean water, shelter, & security  Different missions, goals & objectives of responding partners  Military/Government responders may be limited by classified/non-classified sharing restrictions 38
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Environment "I think multiple means of communication are absolutely necessary, even when deploying down on the Mall for the Reagan funeral, we had to fall back on finding people's personal telephone numbers, we'd use walkie-talkies, we'd go into dead zones, or something. Leone, American Samoa – Tsunami (2009) Results: Delivering information  Formats:  Electronic is favored for:  Portability,  Compatibility with multiple devices  Transferability  BUT, print is still important!  Devices: http://nnlm.gov/webreports/ep/uploads/2009/07/one-shelf-0709.jpg  Many types of devices are used Redundant delivery methods are important! 39
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Delivering information Types of devices used: • PDAs/SmartPhones • CD-Roms • Laptops • Cell Phones • Fax • Cameras • Satellite phones • Thumb drives Important: Internet is accessed via these devices! Results: Resources required "...the frustrating thing is, there's not a good single book for all of this. For instance, the Sphere Guidelines, [is] just for displaced populations, and it's great for that purpose. ...There's not a really good textbook out there, nor have I seen much in the way of recent bibliographies out there." Peter Allen (MA-1) HHS/DMAT – MA-1: Haiti Earthquake (2010) 40
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Resources required Information required by responders is scattered:  Across authoring groups  Across delivery formats & organizations  PDF vs. print vs. html  Government  Across types of  NGOs resources  International agencies  Journals (e.g. UN, WHO, PAHO)  Books  Think tanks  Reports, white papers,  Professional manuals, & technical associations reports  Academic institutions Results: Resources required  Types of grey literature needed:  Policy & legislative information  Local, State, Federal disaster plans & policies  Disaster/emergency specific information  Surveys & assessment tools 41
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Results: Resources required  Cultural, socioeconomic, geographical, endemic health information on affected area  Clinical information  Reporting forms  Patient education materials Results: Resources required Examples of clinical care resources:  Clinical care guidelines & standards  Drug information (substitutions, interactions)  Patient education materials  Quick references (handbooks, downloadable software to PDA/smartphone) 42
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Specific resources mentioned in interviews "having these tools available in one place as opposed to having to recreate them or find them . . . “ (AP Photo/ U.S. Army) Combat Support Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq (2003) 43
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Recommendations Some recommendations for delivery of info to responders: • Centralized access: provide one-stop searching • Easy to navigate • Searchable: users are "Googlers“ • Quick & easy to add information • Robust tagging • Redundancy • Pre-loaded devices • Be prepared to "push" info to users Conclusions "It would have been really nice to have one Web portal where you could go and get current updates related to what was going on within the mission, like how many people had been treated and seen..." FEMA/Casey Deshong DMAT - Pago Pago, American Samoa (2009) 44
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Conclusion: Summary Information needs depend upon:  Deployment role  Type of information needed  When its needed  Nature of disaster  Knowledge of pre-existing resource  Technology available  Other physical constraints (e.g., electricity) Unfortunately, when it comes to accessing information during a disaster, much depends on the nature of the disaster & who is responding. There is no one-size fits all solution! 45
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Lessons Learned  Interview more non - DOD people for balance  Conduct pre-interview informant screening – difficult to find the right person  Conduct study over shorter time period  Use transcription software service How Study Results Helped Us  Inform/Improve disaster preparedness resource collection development  USUHS is developing a portal for disaster response information resources  Promote desired information resources to HHS responders  Results feed into work being done by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) 46
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Next Steps - Other Thoughts  Future research projects:  Questionnaire of USPHS personnel  Additional questions:  Will innovations in mobile devices eliminate communication limitations?  Assist with accessing information?  More information:  NLM Disaster Information Management Resource Center (DIMRC) Contact Us  Nancy Terry National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301.594.6274 E-mail: terryn@mail.nih.gov  Alicia Livinski National Institutes of Health Library Phone: 301-594-6423 E-mail: livinska@od.nih.gov 47
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 The Research Imperative: The Research Policy Statement of the Medical Library Association  Creating a Culture of Research: the Vision  Creating the Health Information Knowledgebase: The Challenge  Domains of Research  Research Skills Set  MLA's Partners: Who Will Make It Happen  Research Policy Statement Recommendations http://www.mlanet.org/research/policy/policy-01_toc.html Resources  Bayley, L., & McKibbon, A. (2006). Evidence-based librarianship:a personal perspective from the medical/nursing realm. Library Hi Tech, 24, 317-323.  Booth, A. (2002). From EBM to EBL: two steps forward or one step back? Med Ref Serv Q, 21(3), 51-64.  Booth, A. (2003). Bridging the Research-Practice Gap? The Role of Evidence Based Librarianship. New Review of Information and Library Research, 9(1), 3 - 23.  Booth, A. (2010). Upon reflection: five mirrors of evidence-based practice. Health Info Libr J, 27(3), 253-256. 48
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Resources 1. Bayley, L., & McKibbon, A. (2006). Evidence-based librarianship:a personal perspective from the medical/nursing realm. Library Hi Tech, 24, 317-323. 2. Booth, A. (2002). From EBM to EBL: two steps forward or one step back? Med Ref Serv Q, 21(3), 51-64. 3. Booth, A. (2003). Bridging the Research-Practice Gap? The Role of Evidence Based Librarianship. New Review of Information and Library Research, 9(1), 3 - 23. 4. Booth, A. (2010). Upon reflection: five mirrors of evidence-based practice. Health Info Libr J, 27(3), 253-256. Resources 5. Booth, A. (nd). Critical Appraisal Checklists. from http://nettingtheevidence.pbworks.com/Critical-Appraisal-Checklists 6. Booth, A., & Brice, A. (2004). Evidence-based practice for information professionals : a handbook. London: Facet Pub. 7. Booth, A., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Moher, D., Petticrew, M., & Stewart, L. An international registry of systematic-review protocols. The Lancet, In Press, Corrected Proof 8. Crumley, E., & Koufogiannakis, D. (2002). Developing evidence- based librarianship: practical steps for implementation*. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 19(2), 61-70. 49
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Resources 9. Crumley, E., & Koufogiannakis, D. (2002). Developing evidence- based librarianship: practical steps for implementation. Health Info Libr J, 19(2), 61-70. 10. Eldredge, J. D. (2004). Inventory of research methods for librarianship and informatics. J Med Libr Assoc, 92(1), 83-90. 11. Eldredge, J. D., Harris, M. R., & Ascher, M. T. (2009). Defining the Medical Library Association research agenda: methodology and final results from a consensus process. J Med Libr Assoc, 97(3), 178-185 Resources 12. Jonathan, E. (2006). Evidence-based librarianship: the EBL process. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 341-354. 13. Koufogiannakis, D., Slater, L., & Crumley, E. (2004). A Content Analysis of Librarianship Research. Journal of Information Science, 30(3), 227-239. 14. Lewis, S. (2006). EBLIP Toolkit. Retrieved September 29, 2010, from http://www.newcastle.edu.au/service/library/gosford/ebl/toolkit/ 15. Lisa, G. (2006). Qualitative research in evidence-based practice: a valuable partnership. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 376-386. 50
  • NIH Library April 2, 2010 Resources 16. Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Wong, R. (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Info Libr J, 27(2), 114-122. 17. Shuichi, U., Shiozaki, J., Kunimoto, C., Miyata, Y., Hayashi, S., Shinji, M., . . . Kurata, K. (2008). Re-Examination of Evidence-based Librarianship (EBL): A Content Analysis of Journal Articles. (English). Library & Information Science(59), 105-115. 18. Wendy Anne, A. (2006). Persuasive Evidence: Improving Customer Service through Evidence Based Librarianship. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice; Vol 1, No 1 (2006). 51