Search

Quality assurance (QA) is an important process in ensuring that systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses are supported by a high‐quality search. This paper describes how the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK established a development pathway to ensure its information specialists had the skills, knowledge and confidence to undertake search QA. The key component of the pathway is that it blends technical knowledge with interpersonal skills. The pathway develops technical skills in the early steps before using peer support activities to build confidence while undertaking a range of searches. QA is effective when the search lead communicates the contextual information that has influenced search development. QA is treated as a collaboration to get the right search for the review. The key requirements for search QA, alongside technical knowledge, are communication, collaboration and negotiation skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developing multi-disciplinary library and information services is high on the agenda for many NHS trusts and this brings with it a climate of change for both those who manage and work in services today. The development of such new services needs to be carefully managed and developed, and this presents a challenge for librarians and service managers. In the UK during 1999 and 2000, Aintree Hospital Trust, in conjunction with Edge Hill College of Higher Education, established a truly multi-disciplinary service based at its hospital site and managed by Edge Hill. This paper outlines the key stages in the development of the Library and Information Service with the focus on the management of change, collaboration and the development of a unique partnership between Higher Education and an NHS trust. The case study example will provide an outline of strategic and project planning, with insights into staff management and development, delivering user expectations and developing stakeholder relationships in the health library setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The authors developed a validated geographic search filter to retrieve research about the United Kingdom (UK) from OVID Embase. It was created to be used alongside their previously published OVID MEDLINE UK filter in systematic literature searches for context‐sensitive topics. Objectives: To develop a validated geographic search filter to retrieve research about the UK from OVID Embase. Methods: The Embase UK filter was translated from the MEDLINE UK filter. A gold standard set of references was generated using the relative recall method. The set contained references to publications about the UK that had informed National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance and it was used to validate the filter. Recall, precision and number‐needed‐to‐read (NNR) were calculated using a case study. Results: The validated Embase UK filter demonstrated 99.8% recall against the references with UK identifiers in the gold standard set. In the case study, the Embase UK filter demonstrated 98.5% recall, 7.6% precision and a NNR of 13. Conclusion: The Embase UK filter can be used alongside the MEDLINE UK filter. The filters have the potential to save time and associated resource costs when they are used for context‐sensitive topics that require research about UK settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A validated geographic search filter for the retrieval of research about the United Kingdom ( UK) from bibliographic databases had not previously been published. Objectives To develop and validate a geographic search filter to retrieve research about the UK from OVID medline with high recall and precision. Methods Three gold standard sets of references were generated using the relative recall method. The sets contained references to studies about the UK which had informed National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ( NICE) guidance. The first and second sets were used to develop and refine the medline UK filter. The third set was used to validate the filter. Recall, precision and number-needed-to-read ( NNR) were calculated using a case study. Results The validated medline UK filter demonstrated 87.6% relative recall against the third gold standard set. In the case study, the medline UK filter demonstrated 100% recall, 11.4% precision and a NNR of nine. Conclusion A validated geographic search filter to retrieve research about the UK with high recall and precision has been developed. The medline UK filter can be applied to systematic literature searches in OVID medline for topics with a UK focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public Health England plays a vital role in ensuring the health of the nation. The Knowledge and Library Service ( KLS) is a key part of the organisation's evidence supply chain. KLS staff handle over 200 requests for literature searches per annum, and this number is increasing exponentially year on year. Searches are often complex and require specialist public health knowledge to complete effectively. Library staff who are new to the area of public health require support and training. In this article, Anh Tran, Knowledge and Evidence Specialist for Public Health England, discusses a peer supported literature search training course that has been developed in-house for the benefit of new library staff, and to increase the Knowledge and Library Service's literature searching capacity at Public Health England. H. S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 'Dissertations into practice' feature began life in March 2012 with a dual aim: to encourage students and new professionals to write for publication and to highlight the impact of student research on policy and practice. This article reflects on the initiative and to summarise what has been achieved so far. It highlights the diverse range of contributions to the feature so far and proves that student research can and does influence policy and practice. It also demonstrates that, with a bit of encouragement and support, students are willing and able to write for academic publication. AM [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Search filters or hedges are search strategies developed to assist information specialists and librarians to retrieve different types of evidence from bibliographic databases. The objectives of this project were to learn about searchers' filter use, how searchers choose search filters and what information they would like to receive to inform their choices. Methods Interviews with information specialists working in, or for, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ( NICE) were conducted. An online questionnaire survey was also conducted and advertised via a range of email lists. Results Sixteen interviews were undertaken and 90 completed questionnaires were received. The use of search filters tends to be linked to reducing a large amount of literature, introducing focus and assisting with searches that are based on a single study type. Respondents use numerous ways to identify search filters and can find choosing between different filters problematic because of knowledge gaps and lack of time. Conclusions Search filters are used mainly for reducing large result sets (introducing focus) and assisting with searches focused on a single study type. Features that would help with choosing filters include making information about filters less technical, offering ratings and providing more detail about filter validation strategies and filter provenance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore the impact of hand-held computers on patient care by identifying: (i) how often clinical staff accessed resources on hand-held computers to inform their clinical decision making; (ii) Which hand-held resources were thought to be most useful in the clinical setting; (iii) the barriers to using hand-held resources to support patient care. Design: A descriptive study comparing aspects of Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) resource use in two phases, between August 2002 and December 2003. There was variability in the way that resources were accessed between the two studies. Setting: University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, an acute teaching hospital, and one primary care practice. Participants: A purposive sample of 14 clinical and librarian staff participated in phase one and 14 in phase two of the study. Participants consisted of consultants, nurses, pharmacist, junior doctors, clinical librarians, and a general practitioner. Main outcome measures: Baseline Data Questionnaire to identify the participants’ level of knowledge and use of hand-helds on entering the study. End-of-phase questionnaire with self-reported measures of use of the hand-held and PDA resources during the study. Results: All of the participants used hand-helds in their clinical setting to support evidence-based practice and education, but with varying frequency. More staff reported using the hand-held to answer specific patient questions in phase two than phase one of the study. UK resources were preferred to American resources. The ‘ plug-in and go’ method using Secure Digital (SD) cards was preferred to downloading resources from the Internet. Conclusions: Hand-held technology is emerging as an effective clinical tool to aid evidence-based practice and support the educational needs of clinical staff. The hand-held can provide a critical mass of information that is relevant, quickly accessible and in a coherent format: delivering clinical information at the point of need with a resulting benefit to patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to assess the performance, in terms of sensitivity and precision, of different approaches to searchingmedline andembase to identify studies of adverse effects. Methods: Five approaches to searching for adverse effects evidence were identified: approach 1, using specified adverse effects; approach 2, using subheadings/qualifiers; approach 3, using text words; approach 4, using indexing terms; approach 5, searching for specific study designs. The sensitivity and precision of these five approaches, and combinations of these approaches, were compared in a case study using a systematic review of the adverse effects of seven anti-epileptic drugs. Results: The most sensitive search strategy inmedline (97.0%) required a combination of terms for specified adverse effects, floating subheadings, and text words for ‘adverse effects’. Inembase, a combination of terms for specified adverse effects and text words for ‘adverse effects’ provided the most sensitive search strategy (98.6%). Both these search strategies yielded low precision (2.8%). Conclusions: A highly sensitive search in either database requires a combination of approaches, and has low precision. This suggests that better reporting and indexing of adverse effects is required and that an effective generic search filter may not yet be feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the use of evidence-based practice as a means of improving the quality of health care, by ensuring that clinical decisions are based on updated research evidence. The Great Britain National Health Service Executive guidelines on Library and Information Services state that libraries and their staff play a central role in the support of evidence-based clinical practice. Although training and resources are available, obstacles remain for clinicians in putting evidence into practice. At present, providing access to thousands of journals and training clinicians in database searching and critical appraisal constitutes a not insignificant use of resources in health libraries. However, clinicians in practice do not have the time to access these resources, nor the skill to use databases for their information needs.

To determine the current level of library service to people in their own homes in the United Kingdom and to compare it with results from previous surveys. It is many years since a similar survey has been undertaken or guidelines produced and it is hoped that this work will help fill the gap. A questionnaire was sent in January 2004 to all public library authorities in the UK, a total of 208; 72% (149) were returned in the timescale allowed. The questionnaire covered the criteria for eligibility to receive a home library service; service structure and delivery: who delivers the service (specialist librarians or specialist non-professional staff, branch library staff or volunteers); training; range of material and services provided; reading aids; materials for reminiscence; information provision; transporting people to the library; services to people in residential homes, sheltered accommodation, nursing homes and day centres; reader development; lifelong learning; and publicity and promotion. The focus of the survey was on quality issues and good practice wherever possible. The number of customers receiving a service to ‘housebound’ readers in the UK in 2001/2 was 123 407. In 1984 it was 43 807 people in England. This still bears little relation to the number of people who should be receiving the service. The majority used paid staff (88%). Volunteers supported 52% of the services, with most having links with staff. There were opportunities to improve and develop services under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The service was publicized and promoted by only 62% of the respondents. Of those that use paid staff and that answered this question, 73% provide disability equality training for staff. Only 21% provide disability equality training for volunteers. Only 36% are involved in reader development or lifelong learning and only 23% provide a newsletter in print, 11% on tape and 3% in Braille; 12% take laptops into people's homes. Many authorities were still providing a tokenistic service and were reluctant to publicize for fear of not coping with demand, which makes them vulnerable legally under the DDA. However, there were some excellent examples of good practice where the full range of services are provided to a high standard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]