Tuesday, May 20th- Presentations
Be sure to visit and support your Midwest colleagues! Share and tweet #mlanet14 !
Corporate Information Services Section: Boarding out: The Embedded Librarian
Stepping out Even Further: Expanding the Role of the Clinical Informationist
2:43 PM – 3:02 PM Room: Columbus GH, Gold Level, East Tower
Heather N. Holmes, AHIP, Clinical Informationist, Summa Health System, Akron, OH
Objectives: This session will discuss expanding the role of a clinical informationist (CI) from a hospital-based position primarily working with resident physicians to working in an outpatient internal medicine clinic focusing on patient education.
Methods: One afternoon a week has been dedicated for a CI to be in an outpatient internal medicine clinic. This is a very different role for a CI, as most are based with inpatient teams or departments. The CI has developed and maintains a “library” of a current and evidence-based resources for many common visits, but for this project the CI actively participates in a case as the resident presents it to the attending physician. Additional questions may be asked by the CI, or she will begin to pull consumer-based education materials for the patient to take home. Further, we anticipate having the CI begin doing one-on-one consults with some patients with the goal of improving clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. A limited population of patients will be selected to facilitate measuring results.
Dental Section: Educational Technology: We Build It-Do They Come?
Designed Locally, Accessed Globally: Building a Better Evidence-Based Practice Tutorial
2:43 PM – 3:02 PM Room: Columbus AB, Gold Level, East Tower
Anne Beschnett, Outreach Librarian, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Lisa A. McGuire, Associate Director, Education and Research Services, University of Minnnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
James Beattie, Liaison Librarian, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Jonathan Koffel, Clinical Information Librarian, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MI
Lindsay Matts, Instructional Designer, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Andre J. Nault, Head and Associate Librarian, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota
Elizabeth Fine Weinfurter, Liaison Librarian, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Objectives: To describe the revision of a globally viewed online evidence-based practice tutorial and its usage patterns before and after the revision.
Methods: The University of Minnesota Bio-Medical Library first created its evidence-based practice tutorial in 2000, and in 2007, it was updated to reflect contemporary evidence-based resources and practice and to make the tool interactive. In 2012, the tutorial garnered 790,000 page-views from around the world. In 2013, a group of health sciences librarians and an instructional designer overhauled the tutorial to add case studies covering additional health professions and provide better coverage and exercises on critical appraisal methods. In addition, the underlying technology was changed to better meet current web standards and streamline the process of making edits in the future. The revised tutorial was announced on campus, and faculty were encouraged to incorporate it into their courses. The various versions of the tutorial have been tracked using Google Analytics, and the authors investigated on-campus versus off-campus usage, traffic sources, and similar statistics.
Relevant Issues Section: Protecting Patron Privacy in the Era of Surveillance
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Privacy Issues
2:30 PM – 2:55 PM Room: Columbus EF, Gold Level, East Tower
Jacqueline Leskovec, Outreach, Planning and Evaluation Coordinator, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois
Hospital Libraries Section: Soaring from a Solid Base: Accreditation, Competencies, Standards, Values
Standards, Competencies, Milestones, and the Value of the Medical Library
3:02 PM – 3:21 PM Room: Regency A, Gold Level, West Tower
Ingrid Philibert, Department of Field Activities, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), Chicago, Illinois
Description: At the conclusion of the session, attendees will be able to:
list requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) related to medical library capabilities and functions to support physician education, including revisions in these standards to adapt to the reduction in print media and the growing use electronic resources;
discuss competency-based education and the value of the medical library;
describe best practices for connecting with and supporting resident physicians and faculty across a range of activities critical to the professional development of physicians.
Research Section: Systematic Review: The Librarian’s Role
Reproducibility of Systematic Review Search Strategies in Cardiology, Surgery, and Pediatrics Journals
2:24 PM – 2:43 PM Room: Regency B, Gold Level, West Tower
Jonathan Koffel, Clinical Information Librarian, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MI
Melissa L. Rethlefsen, AHIP, Education Technology Librarian, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Objectives: To measure the reproducibility of search strategies included in systematic reviews in cardiology, surgery, and pediatrics journals and identify predictors of reproducibility.
Methods: A well-described search strategy allows readers to gauge the comprehensiveness of a systematic review and replicate it as needed. It is unclear, however, how often published search strategies are reproducible and what factors may influence this. A search was conducted to identify all systematic reviews published in 2012 in the ten highest impact factor journals in surgery, cardiology, and pediatrics. The authors independently examined the search strategies in these articles for elements of reproducibility (e.g., database names, search terms, explicit use of Boolean terms, limits) and the strategies were categorized as reproducible/not reproducible and the individual elements recorded. In addition, the authors independently recorded other characteristics of the searches and studies (e.g., librarian involvement, mention of PRISMA Statement), which they hypothesized might affect reproducibility. The data were analyzed to determine overall rates and specific predictors of reproducibility.
A Pipeline of Informatics Tools to Accelerate the Writing of Systematic Reviews
2:43 PM – 3:02 PM Room: Regency B, Gold Level, West Tower
Neil R. Smalheiser, Associate Professor, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois
Objectives: The writing of systematic reviews is largely a manual process–initially retrieving a large excess of articles, and reading their titles and abstracts to find relatively few relevant ones to be analyzed in detail. We hypothesized that specialized informatics tools can be developed to streamline this process significantly.
Methods: We formed an inter-institutional consortium to study the systematic review process and to develop a pipeline of tools that can assist users at critical bottleneck points: (a) A metasearch engine, Metta, was created to carry out unified, deduplicated queries across the five most utilized biomedical databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register, and PsycINFO). (b) A publication type tagger modeled the characteristics of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) using machine learning. The model estimated the probability that any given article represents a RCT, and this was applied to retag all human-related studies in MEDLINE. The model identified many RCTs that had not been indexed as RCTs by publication type, and conversely, the model flagged articles that were indexed as RCT publication type but that were not RCTs. (c) An aggregator model was developed that estimates the probability that any two RCT articles in PubMed arise from the same underlying clinical trial. This model was applied to PubMed searches, to cluster together all retrieved articles that are likely to arise from the same trial.
Results: Each of the three tools are available as working prototypes. Metta is freely available for testing and comments at mengs1.cs.binghamton.edu/metta/search.action, and we are building web interfaces for the others.
Conclusions: Our current goals are to make sure that the tools are aligned with the needs of systematic reviewers and to fit them together into an integrated pipeline. We believe that this approach should significantly reduce the time and effort needed to assemble articles for a systematic review. The automated RCT tagger also may be useful, prospectively and retrospectively, for quality control in the assignment of manual RCT publication type tagging.
Flipping the Classroom: Developing and Piloting a Successful Systematic Review Course for Librarians Utilizing Online and In-Person Instruction
3:02 PM – 3:21 PM Room: Regency B, Gold Level, West Tower
Mark P. MacEachern, Informationist, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Marisa L. Conte, Clinical and Translational Science Liaison, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Nandita S. Mani, AHIP, Assistant Director, Enabling Technologies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Judith Smith, Informationist, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Caitlin Kelley, Graduate Student, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Objectives: To develop a systematic review course for librarians utilizing a “flipped classroom” model for instruction.
Methods: Librarians at the University of Michigan’s Taubman Health Sciences Library developed a pilot course to teach librarians about systematic reviews (SR) and discuss librarian roles in SR project teams. The course followed a hybrid “flipped classroom” model, with instruction provided online in an intensive two-week curriculum followed by a two-day in-person workshop. Group participation and targeted learning activities played a key role in the workshop, which culminated with a capstone project preparing librarians to deploy their new knowledge at their home institutions.
Results: A detailed course assessment plan–which included pre- and post-tests, course evaluations, and a post-course focus group–was used to obtain participant feedback and drive refinements in course organization, delivery, and content. Participants reiterated across multiple assessments that the hybrid structure of the course was not only enjoyable but facilitated and strengthened learning. A majority of participants (80%) “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that the online course had a good amount of activity, and 100% “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the activities facilitated learning. Nearly 100% of participants “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that the in-person workshop reinforced SR concepts and practical applications.
Conclusions: The results of the assessments were overwhelmingly positive with participants expressing that the hybrid model reinforced learning and that instruction was effective. There were, however, a few areas in which the course could be improved. The pre- and post-tests, for example, could be redesigned to better gauge participant knowledge, and some of the activities could be timed differently. The participants expressed strong appreciation for the course’s focus on practical applications and skills, which the instructors could build upon in future offerings. By making slight course modifications to address the issues highlighted by the assessments, the instruction team should be able to improve upon an already successful course.
Technical Services Section: The Evolving Role of Metadata in Medical Libraries: Structure for Evidence, Discovery, and Research
Development of a Research Audit Database for Data-Driven Discovery of Interdisciplinary Biomedical Research on a Large Research Campus
2:50 PM – 3:05 PM Room: Columbus KL, Gold Level, East Tower
Margaret Burnette, Biomedical Sciences Librarian and Assistant Professor, University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois
Objectives: To develop a new model for identify and mapping interdisciplinary biomedical research on a large research campus where project partners are often geographically dispersed. The Research Audit model will be adapted from established knowledge management methods such as the Knowledge Audit and Social Network Analysis.
Methods: Setting: A large research university with robust interdisciplinary biomedical research projects. Population Researchers and campus units involved in National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded research projects. Database Development: A student in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science will assist with database design as part of their coursework. An Excel relational database will host both researcher and unit level information. Campus specific data will be generated from the NIH Reporter, providing project-level information, principal investigators, and department/unit information used to populate the database. Medical Subject Headings will be assigned as metadata tags to describe unit level research missions and investigator research areas. Data Analysis: A knowledge audit approach provides unit level information and the Social Network Analysis generates relationship maps. Text mining and word clouds will round out resulting data.
Top Technology Trends VII
Patricia F. Anderson, Emerging Technologies Librarian, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Description: 3D printing (from Makerbots to biofabrication) is dramatically impacting health through the potential to customize medical devices, create unique presurgical models of patient’s organs, personalize prosthetics, create new solutions for assistive technologies, and more. Librarians can help by tracking and directing information to appropriate audiences, creating guides, teaching workshops on software and hardware choices, partnering with communities, discovering the newest tools/search engines, and generally taking core library skills into this new tech space for health care.