25 results
9 - Growing the Evidence Base in Healthcare Knowledge and Library Services
- Edited by Geoff Walton, Frances Johnson, David Stewart, Gil Young, Holly Case Wyatt
-
- Book:
- Introduction to Healthcare Knowledge and Library Services
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 22 February 2024
- Print publication:
- 11 January 2024, pp 143-162
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
This chapter introduces evidence-based library and information practice, focusing on the importance of developing the evidence base for healthcare knowledge and library services. It highlights the importance of librarians conducting research to develop the evidence base for the profession. If the research is to grow the evidence base, the authors argue that part of the research process is the sharing of findings. The chapter covers skills both for conducting research and for librarians supporting research teams.
Introducing evidence-based library and information practice
Healthcare librarianship is central to enabling health and care professionals to provide and demonstrate evidence-based practice. Evidence-based practice, which grew out of evidence-based medicine, depends upon access to and application of evidence that is based on research, alongside clinical judgement based on experience (Greenhalgh, 1999). Building on their role in providing evidence to NHS colleagues, healthcare librarians have worked with librarians across other sectors on the development of evidence-based practice for librarianship itself.
Evidence-based library and information practice (EBLIP) is an approach to professional decision-making that grew out of the initial evidence-based medicine movement, when health librarians realised the importance of practising what they were preaching to clinicians (Koufogiannakis and Brettle, 2016a). The most recent model of EBLIP (Koufogiannakis and Brettle, 2016a) promotes an overall approach to practice that is about ‘being evidence-based’ (see Figure 9.1 on the next page) rather than simply using evidence in decision-making. The model acknowledges the use of research evidence, local evidence and professional knowledge (Koufogiannakis, 2011, 53) and a cyclical process involving: articulating problems or questions; assembling the evidence; assessing the evidence; agreeing a way forward; and adapting by revisiting goals and reflecting in order to evaluate what is working and what needs to change (Koufogiannakis and Brettle, 2016b).
The literature on the use of evidence by healthcare librarians and knowledge specialists for their own profession suggests that there is a greater emphasis on supporting evidence-based medicine rather than developing EBLIP (Spring et al., 2014). Murphy uses the analogy of a midwife, enabling others to give birth to research rather than conducting research and publishing to contribute to the evidence base for library and information practice (Murphy, 2015).
In line with the approach to being evidence-based noted in Figure 9.1 above, this chapter considers the importance of developing the evidence base for healthcare knowledge and library services.
13 - The information specialist as an expert searcher
-
- By Alison Brettle, Professor in Health Information and Evidence- Based Practice at the University of Salford in the UK.
- Edited by Paul Levay, Jenny Craven
-
- Book:
- Systematic Searching
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2019
- Print publication:
- 30 November 2018, pp 269-288
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Information specialists play a key role in undertaking the searching for systematic reviews. This chapter traces the context, background and history of how the role has evolved over the last 20 years, before considering the challenges and debates facing today's expert searchers. Examples from the literature and practice will be used to highlight the debates before a summary of future directions for research and practice for expert searchers concludes the chapter.
The evolving role of the information specialist
Opportunities provided by evidence-based practice and systematic reviews
Evidence-based practice (EBP), with its emphasis on finding evidence, offered information specialists a wide range of opportunities for using and promoting their skills. For over 20 years, information specialists have been encouraged to undertake new roles and demonstrate their expertise within the EBP context (Falzon and Booth, 2001; Harris, 2005; McGowan and Sampson, 2005; Medical Library Association, 2005; Palmer, 1996). These roles have mainly focused on using traditional information skills in teaching others to find evidence and searching for evidence on behalf of others (both for individual patient care and within a systematic review context). There is some evidence of role development using critical appraisal, research and management skills and outreach roles (Brettle, 2009; Brettle and Urquhart, 2011).
The main focus of this chapter is on the role of the information specialist as an expert searcher within the context of systematic reviews. This role has been documented over time (Beverley, Booth and Bath, 2003; Spencer and Eldredge, 2018), although it has not been fully explored or evaluated.
Evidence-based practice itself has evolved from its origins in medicine, across health care to a means of decision-making in a wide range of other professions from librarianship (Koufogiannakis and Brettle, 2016) to policing (Sherman, 1998). The systematic review, although around since the 1970s, gained significant momentum in the late 1990s with interest from policymakers (Moher, Stewart and Shekelle, 2015) and organizations such as Cochrane (www.cochrane. org) and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (www.york.ac. uk/crd) and more recently the EPPI-Centre (http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms), the Campbell Collaboration (www.campbellcollaboration.org) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (www.joannabriggs.org). The key feature of a systematic review is the use of formal and explicit methods which describe, at the outset, the question to be answered, the search for evidence and the assessment and synthesis of the evidence (Moher, Stewart and Shekelle, 2015).
3 - Articulate
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK., Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 19-26
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
EBLIP begins with a question, a need to understand the problem, which is then articulated or clarified. For librarians this may be an area where service improvement is required, or it may be related to the management of the library's collection, for example. It could be a question about how an instruction or academic librarian should best teach information literacy concepts, or it could involve a big decision such as the reconfiguration of reference services in the library. Different stakeholders may have different types of questions; for example, practitioners’ questions may well be about practice, whereas managers, funders or policy makers may want evidence to demonstrate the use or value of a service. This chapter will outline the importance of a clear question and describe methods that have been used to clarify and situate questions within EBP.
The importance of a clear question
Eldredge notes that ‘Questions drive the entire EBL process. […] The wording and content of the questions will determine what kinds of research designs are needed to secure answers’ (Eldredge, 2000b, 292). This is true to a certain extent, but, as noted in the previous chapter, this book follows a holistic approach to EBLIP. We need to ensure that the question allows us to capture what we already know and incorporates local evidence and our professional knowledge. Therefore, it is more appropriate that the wording and content of the question will allow us to consider all the relevant evidence that we may want to use in order to answer the question.
A clear question will enable us to find the appropriate evidence to help us make the decision (Booth, 2006). Just as when embarking on a research project it is important to have a clear research question, because vague research questions tend to lead to vague results, with EBLIP, clear questions will help us make better-informed decisions.
Davies (2011) suggests that articulating the question also involves a period of reflection, considering issues such as ‘Is this really what I'm looking for?’, ‘Why am I looking for this information?’ and ‘Is there another option to pursue first?’ As well as being clear about the question or problem itself, we need to think about what we know already, the ultimate purpose of the decision (or question), and we must be honest about assumptions or difficulties that may present obstacles.
14 - Conclusion
- from PART 2 - EBLIP IN ACTION
-
- By Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 165-170
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In this book we have attempted to provide you with an overview of the current state of EBLIP, as well as tools to help you develop an evidence-based approach. EBLIP has shifted over the years, developing from roots in EBM into a model that takes the unique context of LIS professionals into account. The model we have presented is one that was derived from observation, tested and developed by empirical research and, through the case approach in this book, has been demonstrated to be widely applicable across library sectors. The model takes a more holistic view of evidence as well as of the cyclical nature of professional decision making. It also considers barriers to practising in an evidence-based way. While we have presented a model with various stages, we want to emphasize that it is not the exact stages that are important. Having a model is a helpful way to consider and discuss aspects of the process and to break it down into steps that seem manageable. However, we hope that this book has emphasized that EBP is more about approaching practice with a particular mindset, rather than about checking off steps in a process.
Being evidence based means that you consider your practice from a curious and questioning perspective, with a view to continuous improvement. As such, you question what you are currently doing and think about possible ways to do things better. This questioning leads you to gather evidence sources that are best to help answer your questions. Where no good evidence sources exist, or to make sense of your context, you engage in gathering local evidence or in doing research that is appropriate to the question at hand. You share what you learn with others in order to improve the knowledge of the profession and grow a community of practice that ultimately changes the profession for the better. You implement solutions that you believe are the best, based on the evidence you have found, and then reflect on and further evaluate whether your new implementation has worked. You talk about what you are doing with your community of users, and listen to and incorporate their feedback, adapting services over time.
6 - Agree
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 59-70
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
After assessing and weighing all the evidence, you need to determine what would be the best course of action in answering your question and implementing a solution in practice. We call this point in the process Agree because, more often than not, you will not be the only one making the decision. Quite often library-based decisions are made in groups, which could consist of an internal group of librarians assigned to come up with a solution. Even if you do work on something by yourself, at the point of decision, others may be involved.
At this point in the process you must determine the best way forward, based on your assessment of the various sources of evidence (Chapter 5). It is important to remember that we all bring biases to our interpretation of the evidence as a whole, so recognizing this is an important step toward making better decisions. In this chapter we discuss some of these factors that may influence the decision-making process.
As you are working through this process, some of the questions you need to ask include whether you have looked at all the evidence openly and without prejudice; what is the best decision based on everything we know from the problem, the context and the evidence; and whether you have considered all reasonable alternatives.
Ultimately, you will need to determine a course of action and begin implementation of the decision. Ideally, you would be able to reach consensus among those making the decision, based on the strength of the evidence found and considered. However, it is unlikely that this will always be the case. The more clearly you can present to others the reasons for your decision, the evidence that was reviewed and how it led you to the decision made, the easier your implementation will be at an organizational level. In this chapter we will explore some of the factors within individual and group decision making that librarians should be aware of in order to ensure that the process and implementation are as smooth as possible. Figure 6.1 illustrates the influences on effective decision making that we will discuss in this chapter.
2 - A new framework for EBLIP
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 11-18
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The model for EBLIP that we use in this book is based on doctoral research results (Koufogiannakis, 2013b). It is not meant to be a rejection of previous EBLIP theory, nor does it stand in opposition to the model as put forward by Booth and Brice and published in 2004. If anything, the model we propose in this book builds upon Booth and Brice's (2004b) model as it was first described but reaches further, to embrace other types of evidence as appropriate for librarianship and to consider how such a merging of different types of evidence can work in the context of librarianship. As such, the model is far more realistic with respect to the context in which librarians work and the appropriate forms of evidence on which to base decisions. At the same time, it attempts to encourage further research within our profession in order to strengthen the evidence base upon which we draw external validation of local practices.
Much credit must be given to Andrew Booth for envisioning this evolution of EBLIP through his reflection on evidence-based practice in librarianship following the EBLIP5 conference that was held in Stockholm, Sweden (Booth, 2009b). Booth, having been very involved with EBLIP since its start and a keen observer of the general change in the field's discourse, noted the following limitations of the original model as it stood at the time: ‘first it is oriented to individual, not collective, activity; and, second, it seeks to simplify and thus preserve the integrity of, the entire EBP process making no allowances for the realities of pragmatism and expediency’ (Booth, 2009b, 342). Koufogiannakis (2013b) validated these observations in her doctoral study of how academic librarians use evidence in their practice. Her thesis, based on qualitative research, proposed the use of Booth's ‘alternative’ model to move towards a process that would be more meaningful and pragmatic for practising librarians. This book provides the next step in making this model available for librarians of all sectors to use in their practice.
We doubt that any one model will perfectly fit all situations or explain the complexity of EBP in its fullness, because we can never look in detail at every situation or circumstance.
1 - Introduction
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 3-10
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This book brings together recent theory, research and case studies from practice environments across the broad field of librarianship to illustrate how librarians can incorporate the principles of evidence-based library and information practice (EBLIP) into their work. EBLIP is an approach to professional decision making; however, we wish to emphasize an overall approach to practice that is about being evidence based, which is not limited only to decision making. Being evidence based involves:
• questioning our practice:
— are we doing things in the best way, and is there a better way?
— do we have the information we need to do our jobs?
— do we have the evidence we need to make well-informed decisions?
— why are we making the decisions that we are making?
• gathering or creating the evidence (through research or evaluation) if we don't have it already
• using information or evidence wisely:
— to make decisions about our own practice
— to improve our practice by testing out new ideas and implementing them based on the evidence we find
— to make decisions about our services
— to help others make decisions about our services (by demonstrating our effectiveness, value, impact or worth)
• using our professional skills to help others (often to make their own evidencebased decisions).
This book develops and rethinks the original EBLIP model. It takes an open and inclusive approach to exploring EBLIP and the ways in which it can improve the practice of librarianship. Since EBLIP's inception in 1997 the understanding of what evidence is, as well as how and why librarians use evidence, has grown more mature. Correspondingly, this book puts forward a model and approach to evidence that has evolved but is more realistic and practical for librarians in their everyday work.
This book builds upon the seminal work of Booth and Brice (2004b) by incorporating recent research and practice- based examples to illustrate the natural progression of EBLIP since Booth and Brice's work was published. This book seeks to provide librarians with an accessible new reference point for how they can use and create evidence within their practice to better meet the needs of their communities. It is organized into two sections; the first is structured around Koufogiannakis’ revised framework for EBLIP (Koufogiannakis, 2013), which embraces a wider breadth of evidence sources and understanding of how librarians use evidence.
4 - Assemble
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 27-44
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Working within the EBLIP process, librarians need to assemble evidence from a variety of sources that are most appropriate to the problem or question at hand. Assembling evidence is key to the whole concept of EBP, and determining the sources of evidence that one will draw upon when making practice-based decisions is paramount. We must use professional judgement to determine the best and most appropriate sources of evidence, depending upon what we want to know. Evidence may come from external sources, locally gathered data or our own professional knowledge. This chapter will start with an overview of the concept of evidence and how it relates to librarianship, explore different types of evidence and look more specifically at sources of evidence within librarianship and how to find the needed evidence. The goal of this chapter is to expand your thinking about what evidence is and to help you determine some of the sources that you can draw upon. Being evidence based means that we consider many forms of evidence in conjunction with one another to form a well informed and considered professional opinion.
The concept of evidence
To begin considering what types of evidence we should seek and then use as part of decision making within librarianship, we first need to ask ‘what is evidence’ within our field. This is no small question, but one that underlines the whole evidence-based approach.
The Oxford Dictionary (2010) states that evidence is ‘the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid’. Scholars agree that evidence is that which serves as a form of proof (Hornikx, 2005; Reynolds and Reynolds, 2002; Twinning, 2003; Upshur, Van Den Kerkhof and Goel, 2001). Schrum (2011) notes that evidence has three major properties – relevance, credibility and inferential force or weight (p. 19). This means that, to be considered as evidence, pieces of information must be relevant to the question at hand, must be considered credible or trustworthy and must show strength in comparison to other pieces of information that are being considered. We will consider how to assess the credibility and weight of evidence in more detail later, in Chapter 5.
5 - Assess
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK., Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 45-58
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Assess is a critical part of EBLIP and involves assessing the located evidence for its quality (often known as appraisal or critical appraisal) and quantity. There is also a need to weigh up or balance the results from different types of evidence, to get to know the evidence and what it is saying and then to put it into the context of the wider, overarching problem and the situation in which the decision is being made. While previous work within EBLIP has focused on appraising or assessing research evidence, this chapter will begin with research evidence but move on to examining how to assess other types of evidence and incorporating these into the decision-making process.
When assessing the evidence you may be asking yourself: of the evidence assembled, what pieces of evidence hold the most weight? Why? What evidence seems to be most trustworthy and valid? What evidence is most applicable to the current problem? What parts of this evidence can be applied to my context? This chapter considers how research evidence can be assessed using critical appraisal techniques, how critical appraisal techniques can be developed and used more routinely, the role of systematic reviews and a framework for weighing different types of evidence against each other. It aims to help you evaluate and weigh evidence sources and determine what the evidence says as a whole. Although assessing is a critical part of the EBLIP process, it is worth bearing in mind that there is little point in solely paying attention to this part of the process if the articulate and assemble aspects have not been thoughtfully executed in the first place.
Critical appraisal
Critical appraisal of research is an element of EBLIP that has received much attention in the literature and in practice. It is an important part of the process because it helps you to determine the worth of the research literature, but doing critical appraisal is not a skill that most librarians have been familiar or comfortable with. However, it is a skill that is relatively easy to teach and can be developed over time. Furthermore, some elements of the process are akin to other tasks that librarians are familiar with, such as critical thinking (a skill developed during master's-level study), or choosing the most appropriate results from a literature search, which requires decisions about applicability.
11 - Health libraries
- from PART 2 - EBLIP IN ACTION
-
- By Jonathan D. Eldredge, Associate Professor at the University of New Mexico., Joanne Gard Marshall, MLS MHSc PhD spent 16 years as a medical librarian before becoming a faculty member at the University of Toronto in 1987., Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK., Heather N. Holmes, MLIS AHIP is the Associate Director of Libraries with a faculty appointment of Associate Professor at the Medical University of South Carolina, Lotta Haglund, MLIS is Head of Library and Archive at the Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, in Stockholm, Sweden since 2012, Rick Wallace, Professor and Associate Director at the Quillen College of Medicine Library at East Tennessee State University in Johnson City, Tennessee.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 121-132
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
The historical evidence suggests that the health professions might never have developed EBP had it not been for the development of sophisticated research tools such as PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for identifying authoritative evidence (Eldredge, 2008a). By working with health professionals in using these tools, health librarians were pivotal figures in the development of Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) and the broader EBP movement. From supporting health professionals in EBP, health librarians have gone on to develop and use evidence within their professional practices – EBLIP. This chapter will provide a context for health librarian's work, describe EBLIP within the health library field and the state of the evidence base, and discuss the types of evidence used by health librarians. Two case studies show how EBLIP has been translated into practice and demonstrate how health librarians continue to push the boundaries of EBLIP. Finally, the future directions for research and EBLIP practice will be considered within a health library context.
The health library context
Health librarians often collaborate with other health professionals in a fast-paced environment that demands high levels of accountability for the accuracy of their work. Any mistakes can result in missed diagnoses, inappropriate treatments, incorrectly trained health professionals (Maggio et al., 2015) or misguided research projects. Many health librarians take years to establish credibility for their expert skills among other health professionals (Hannigan and Eldredge, 2014). With increasing frequency, health librarians work outside of physical libraries in roles as embedded colleagues, liaisons, clinical librarians, informaticists and informaticians; therefore, throughout this chapter the term health librarian will be used to describe all of these roles.
The context in which health librarians work is continuing to change (Funk, 2013). At one time, the majority of health librarians worked in hospital libraries. Now, in the USA many librarians work in centralized academic health-science centre libraries that co-ordinate access to electronic databases for their users, including health professionals and staff in affiliated hospitals. The National Library of Medicine in the USA coordinates outreach and other centralized functions. In the UK, health librarians work in hospitals, academic institutions and, increasingly, throughout other NHS organizations. Collections for NHS staff are centralized and health libraries are monitored and supported by a national Library and Knowledge Service.
7 - Adapt
- from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
-
- By Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK., Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
- Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
-
- Book:
- Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 August 2016, pp 71-78
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
The final step in the EBLIP process is to evaluate and determine what impact was made, where gaps remain and where improvement is needed for the next time (Adapt).
This involves both reflection on the implementation of the decision and ongoing assessment or evaluation to determine whether the decision is working in the longer term (Booth 2004a). Within the literature, this step appears to be the one that has received the least attention, yet if you are going to the trouble of working through the other steps of the EBLIP process you should also take the time to examine whether your decision worked or made a difference. Furthermore, if you are adopting a whole evidence-based approach to your practice, this shouldn't be seen as a final step but as an ongoing part of the cyclical nature of your way of thinking.
The first reflective step involves thinking about what worked and whether any changes need to be made. New or further questions may also have arisen. The second part of the reflection involves evaluating any service change that was made, so as to determine if it had the desired effect. This can be done via measures of service quality such as benchmarking, performance measures and audit (Booth, 2004a). In reality, the former is more important if the evidence was used for advocacy or to help a stakeholder make a decision about your service, particularly if the decision wasn't a welcome one and led to large service changes. Evaluating service changes to see if they had the desired effect is part of the larger picture relating to quality improvement.
Reflection on the process
Reflection is noted as an important continuing professional development activity within EBLIP (Koufogiannakis, 2010b). In the UK, reflection is part of the process required for professional revalidation with CILIP, whereas in the USA the Medical Library Association has recognized the importance of reflection in the research process, challenging its members to ‘build a culture of reflective practice in which the profession's evidence base is routinely used’ (Grefsheim, Rankin, Perry and McKibbon, 2008, 115). Examinations of how librarians can be more reflective in their practice are becoming more prevalent in the literature (Booth, 2010; Forrest, 2008; Sen, 2010), with an easy approach being to think of reflection in terms of What? So What? Now What? (Alcock, 2014).
Index
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp 181-183
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Part 1 - Context
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp 1-2
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
4 - The influences of governance, consumers and evidence-based practice
- from Part 1 - Context
-
- By Gareth Lawrence, University Hospitals of Leicester, UK, Alison Yeoman, Aberystwyth University, UK, Alison Brettle, University of Salford, UK, Prudence Dalrymple, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp 51-74
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
UK Government policy over the last 15 years has increasingly focused on the need for improved quality, improved accountability and improved choice and involvement for patients (e.g. NHS Executive, 1996, 1999a, 1999b; Secretary of State for Health, 1997, 2002; Department of Health, 2010a). Alongside this, there has been an increasing recognition of the importance of the role of information in the NHS (e.g. NHS Executive, 1998; Department of Health, 2001, 2010b) and the spread of evidence-based practice across health care and policy-making as a whole (Cabinet Office, 1999). This increased recognition of the role of information and evidence has resulted in implications and opportunities for health library and information professionals. This chapter explores these concepts, their corresponding information requirements and implications for health librarians in more detail. Firstly Gareth Lawrence describes information management requirements for clinical governance and how this is used to improve clinical performance. Alison Yeoman explores consumer health information using a study of women's information practices to describe the information needs and choices that consumers face when considering information about their health. Alison Brettle describes the concept of evidence-based practice and its implications for health library and information professionals and Prudence Dalrymple examines how the concept of ‘evidence’ is perceived by clinicians in practice.
WHAT DOES INFORMATION MANAGEMENT FOR CLINICAL GOVERNANCE INVOLVE?
Gareth Lawrence
What is clinical governance?
Clinical governance is ‘a framework through which NHS organizations are accountable for continuously improving the quality of their services and safeguarding high standards of care by creating an environment in which excellence in clinical care will flourish’ (Department of Health, 1999a). It requires high quality information and knowledge both for clinical decision making and performance management, alongside a supportive infrastructure. In discussing information requirements of clinical governance, Booth (2004) suggests that clinical governance requires ‘evidence based practice which puts library-derived research literature at the centre, patient information which requires a hybrid informatics response and risk management and clinical computing which exists almost entirely outside libraries’.
Conclusion
-
- By Christine Urquhart, Aberystwyth University, UK, Alison Brettle, University of Salford, UK
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp 177-180
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In the first part of the book we attempted to describe some of the changes that are taking place in education and in the health service. The emphasis was on events within the UK, but it is also important to remember that the UK is influenced by political initiatives from Europe and elsewhere. Globalization affects the organization and funding of health and education everywhere. We hope, therefore, that the case studies presented in the second part of the book provide some transferable lessons for library and information professionals working in different settings. One of the themes of knowledge management is the power of the story, to explain, through the story of an event, how problems were viewed, structured and solutions found. The stories are memorable, and provide a good memory aid for those seeking solutions to new problems that arise. Some of the case studies may not be immediately useful to you but, nevertheless, we hope that they will spark interest in finding creative solutions to current problems, or perhaps guide you in the design of a new service in the future.
The case studies, inevitably, represent (mostly) the success stories. We do not deny the value of learning from failure, and some of the most interesting and useful lessons for practice can come from reflections on what did not work. Research projects often provide a fund of useful experience on personal learning from failure, but we all know that it is very difficult to find a publication outlet for failed research projects or projects with negative findings. Similarly, it is much easier to find examples of success stories and good practice examples than to find contributors prepared to confess to the reasons why projects or ideas did not work out in practice. That is a drawback for further development of the profession and perhaps we need to be prepared to analyse failures in more detail, and do more careful ‘accident investigation’ in the future. Such accidents often provide the best learning experiences, after all. In the meantime, we can only urge you to read the case studies with some critical reflection on what might have been left out.
About the editors
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp vii-viii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Overview
-
- By Alison Brettle, University of Salford, UK, Christine Urquhart, Aberystwyth University, UK
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp xiii-xx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Library and information professionals working in the health sector have faced challenges on many sides. Rapid developments in information technology and the provision of information coupled with constant organizational change in the public sector, the switch from local service provision to national agreements and the widespread adoption of evidence-based practice have ensured constant change for a number of years. How have library and information professionals met this challenge and how has this affected the roles they play? Will developments in electronic health information services render the hospital librarian obsolete? Is there a need for academic health librarians amongst the Google generation of students? Do health library and information professionals’ skills and knowledge remain relevant?
A profession is ‘a group of individuals who are recognized by the general public as having special knowledge, competencies and skills based on an extensive knowledge base, with extended education and training’ (Cleveland, 2011). It is worth keeping this definition in mind if we are to look forward and ensure that we can answer these challenges and ensure a continued need for health library and information professionals. Alongside, we need to examine the context in which we work, as well as the roles we play, and question whether the skills we have are suitable for those roles and potential roles of the future. This book seeks to do just that. It aims to encourage and inspire health library and information professionals to take on new opportunities and ensure their continued development and recognition as valuable assets in the changing health care environment.
This book does not aim to predict the future, nor highlight all the potential roles available, rather it examines the different contextual factors that may affect how health library and information professionals might work. It showcases a range of roles, whilst examining the skills needed to perform them, both now and in the future.
Changing contexts
Whilst not limited to the UK, a book such as this cannot avoid reference to the UK National Health Service (NHS), which has been subject to continual organizational change for a number of decades.
Part 2 - Roles
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp 75-76
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Frontmatter
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp i-iv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contents
- Edited by Alison Brettle, Christine Urquhart
-
- Book:
- Changing Roles and Contexts for Health Library and Information Professionals
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 23 November 2011, pp v-vi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation