13th EAHIL Conference - Evidence-based library and information practice

Using best evidence to evaluate clinical librarian services

a.brettle — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 07:44:50 +0000

Authors:

Brettle, Alison, University of Salford, United Kingdom

UK North West Clinical Librarians

Abstract:

Objective

To report on a multi-method evaluation study, which demonstrates evidence based library and information practice in action, to assess the impact of clinical librarian services in the UK.

Methods

The methodology has been designed following best practice recommendations for increasing the validity and reliability of CL Impact evaluations made by a recent systematic review (Brettle et al, 2011). Data collection is by questionnaire and semi structured interview and based on the Critical Incident Technique (CIT). The questionnaire was distributed by CLs via online survey 6 weeks following each use of a CL service over a 6 month period. Semi-structured interviews following a standardised schedule were carried out by 6 librarians on a reciprocal basis to illuminate and expand on questionnaire results. A key part of the study is to involve clinical librarians in the design and execution of the project.

Results

Initial analysis suggests, 357 health professionals responded to the survey (45% response rate). Demonstrable impacts on service development and delivery, improved patient care and evidence based practice were highlighted and potential new roles for clinical librarians in areas such as efficiency and risk management emerged. Qualitative data from the interviews will be added to these results to illuminate the findings. Feedback from the librarians involved highlights the benefits of taking part in the project.

Conclusion

An evaluation tool was developed from best available evidence and has been used to evaluate the impact of clinical librarian practice. Emerging evidence suggests that clinical librarians can demonstrate impacts in a number of areas and taking part in such as study is a good way of improving skills in research and EBP.

Keywords:

Clinical librarians, Evaluation, Impact, Evidence based practice

References:

Brettle, A., Maden-Jenkins, M., Anderson, L., McNally, R., Pratchett, T., Tancock, J., Thornton, D. and Webb, A. (2011), Evaluating clinical librarian services: a systematic review. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 28: 3–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2010.00925.x

Session:

Session G. Evidence-based librarianship (EBLIP)

Ref:

Category:

Evidence based library and information practice

Type of presentation:

Oral presentation

An evidence-based professional development strategy for health sciences librarianship in Ireland: using independent research to inform action

aoife.lawton — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:11:04 +0000

Authors:

Lawton, Aoife

Kelly, Kate

Keywords:

Health Science Libraries, health services research, Ireland, Evidence Based Practice

How do Evidence Summaries Impact Library Practice? A New Tool for Assessment

dkoufogi — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:15:38 +0000

Authors:

Koufogiannakis, Denise

Kloda, Lorie

Brettle, Alison

Abstract:

Objective

Since 2006, the open access journal, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice has published over 200 evidence summaries. As with clinical evidence summaries which attempt to bridge the gap between clinical research and healthcare practice, these summaries, consisting of structured abstracts and critical appraisals of original research, attempt to bridge the gap between research and information practice. This study investigates the impact of evidence summaries on librarians’ knowledge and practice by developing and validating an impact assessment tool.

Methods

This mixed methods study began by developing and testing a survey questionnaire to assess impact of evidence summaries on librarians’ knowledge, practice, and user communities. The survey was subsequently disseminated to 153 readers of the journal who were asked to respond with reference to a specific incident in order to determine the types of impact that the evidence summaries may have in areas such as practice improvement, learning, reassurance, and confirmation for decision making. Survey results were collected from 86 participants and follow-up in-depth interviews were conducted with a subsample of 20 participants to expand on the survey’s findings and to determine the validity of the assessment tool.

Results

With a focus on results from the health sector, we will draw upon the feedback of evidence summary readers in order to determine the ways in which evidence summaries are being used. This information will allow us to group data and determine types of impact that the evidence summaries may have. It will provide insights regarding the usefulness of evidence summaries and the potential ways they may be improved.

Conclusion

This study will provide unique insight into whether evidence summaries are an effective means of bridging the research-practice gap. These results can then be applied to the health library community and its scholarly communication channels. The validated impact assessment tool may also be applied to other sources of information in library and information practice. Overall implications for health librarians will be considered.

Keywords:

evidence based practice, research, impact, EBLIP, mixed methods

Category:

Evidence based library and information practice

Type of presentation:

Poster

Sources of Evidence Used by Academic Librarians: A Grounded Theory Study

dkoufogi — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 23:42:07 +0000

Authors:

Koufogiannakis, Denise, University of Alberta, Canada

Abstract:

Objective

This research study examines the foundation of evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP) by exploring how academic librarians use evidence in their practice. The EBLIP model has been noted in the literature since 1997 but the foundation upon which it rests has very little research evidence that is directly relevant to librarians. This paper is part of a larger study, and will focus on the evidence sources used by academic librarians.

Methods

Grounded theory methodology was used. Methods of data collection were diaries (using online blog software) and interviews. Canadian academic librarians reflected upon the questions and decision making that arose in their practice over a one-month time period, noting their thoughts in an online blog. Interviews prompted further exploration of themes or critical incidents that emerged from the participants’ diary entries. Nineteen Canadian academic librarians participated in the study.

Results

The results of this study are still being analysed at this time. They will address how academic librarians (including health sciences librarians) think about the concept of evidence, the sources of evidence they actually use, whether evidence sources vary depending upon the type of problem, and how academic librarians find evidence.

Conclusion

This study will provide research findings about sources of evidence used in academic librarians' decision making, which has not been previously addressed by the literature. The research will be a starting point for the EBLIP movement to look inward and assess its current model. Insights relating to possible impact and changes to the existing model will be discussed.

Keywords:

Evidence based practice, Eblip, Academic librarians, Grounded theory, Research

Session:

Session G. Evidence-based librarianship (EBLIP)

Ref:

Category:

Evidence based library and information practice

Type of presentation:

Oral presentation