Microsoft Word - Ed_Glynn.doc Evidence Based Library and Information Practice Editorial Terminology versus action Lindsay Glynn Editor‐in‐Chief Public Services Librarian and Instruction Coordinator, Health Sciences Library Memorial University of Newfoundland St. Johnʹs, Newfoundland, Canada E‐mail: lglynn@mun.ca © 2006 Glynn. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. I have heard it said, as many of us have, that evidence based library and information practice is an area dominated and led by librarians in the health sciences. It is a logical leap to say that medical librarians may be more familiar with the evidence based model of practice because of their need to be familiar, on some level, with evidence based medicine. The idea of making a decision based on the appropriate evidence is as familiar to a medical librarian as is how to effectively search PubMed. How pervasive is the influence of the medical profession on this area? Being a librarian looking for quick information, I turned to Google. The results on the first two pages from a Google search for evidence based practice are 100% health/medicine related. Being a good librarian, I refined my search to see how the results would differ, and I added the term library to the search. This time there were 75% health/medicine results and 5% representing evidence based library and information practice (eblip). Note that a high percentage of the health/medicine hits were library webpages on evidence based medicine. Being an obsessive‐compulsive librarian, I changed my search strategy again by replacing library with librarianship. This time there were 30% health/medicine results and 65% eblip. A final search for evidence based information had this journal as the top hit. Being a busy librarian with a lot of work to do, I stopped right there. OK, so the terminology appears to point strongly in one direction and weighs heavily on the health sciences penetration. Let’s leave terminology aside for a moment and look at action. Since Evidence Based Library and Information Practice is the first journal on this topic, the list of contributors and their backgrounds should give an indication on whether or not there is a concentration of medical librarians. Approximately two thirds of the articles that we have published are non‐health/medicine related. Only 29% of our Evidence Summaries are based on research in the medical information field. Our 52 Editorial Advisors and 21 Evidence Summaries writers come from many different areas including school libraries, law libraries, library schools, public libraries, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2006, 1:4 2 academic libraries, research institutions, etc. Admittedly, there is some bias here since we make every attempt to ensure that we have a balanced team of Editorial Advisors and Evidence Summary writers. That aside, the evidence based movement, I’m pleased to say, appears to be reaching far beyond medical librarianship. The proverbial saying that “it’s all in the word” doesn’t hold here. You may be practicing in an evidence based manner without even realizing it. Do you make evidence informed decisions? Do you perform action based research? Have you provided a solid literature review to support a proposal? Have you presented a thorough evaluation on an implemented service? Answering yes to any of these questions does not increase the likelihood that you are a librarian in the health sciences. Rather, it demonstrates the far‐reaching evidence based activities of people in this most impressive cadre of professionals in the library and information field. This issue of Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, like the past 3 issues, is robust with excellence. The quality of the research articles and the Evidence Summaries is extraordinary and once again, surpasses my already high expectations. We have reached a milestone: this issue marks the end of our first year as a new journal. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Editorial Team for their remarkable contributions to the success of this journal. Working with this team during the past year has been challenging, exciting, rewarding and humbling. To Denise Koufogiannakis and Alison Brettle, I thank you for your tireless work, endless patience and devotion to excellence. To Pam Ryan, I thank you for keeping us all on track, for managing the technology that allows the journal to exist in an open access format and for your invaluable insight. To Priscilla Stephenson and Heather Pretty, your thorough attention to detail as copyeditors is most impressive and I thank you for this invaluable contribution. To Erin Alcock, ensuring that all metadata is entered in DOAJ means that our articles are more accessible – thank you. To our Editorial Advisory Board and Evidence Summaries writers, this journal would not exist without your continued dedication and expertise. Finally, on behalf of the entire Evidence Based Library and Information Practice team, I extend gratitude to the authors and readers for your interest, support and inspiring contributions. May you all have a safe and thoroughly enjoyable holiday season.