





































Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           39                                                                                

 

MLA 2017 Research Section Research Awards  

Congratulations to the Winning Research Papers and Posters from MLA ’17! 

The MLA Research Section is pleased to announce the winners for best research papers and 

posters presented at the MLA 2017 annual meeting in Seattle, WA. Thank you to the 57 judges 

who volunteered their expertise to help select these deserving awardees. To learn more about 

the awards and selection process, visit the Research Section website at 

http://www.mlanet.org/p/cm/ld/fid=938. 

 

Contributed Papers 
 

1st Place 
Authors: Christy Jarvis, AHIP, Head of Information Resources and Digital Initiatives, University 

of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Melissa Rethlefsen, AHIP, Deputy Director / Associate Librarian, 

Spencer S. Eccles Health Sciences Library, Salt Lake City, UT 

Title: Daring to Dive Deep into the Citation Data: Going Head to Head with SciHub 

Abstract: 

Objectives: To analyze the extent to which the library is fulfilling the information needs of its 

patrons in light of recent data showing heavy usage of SciHub in [our metro city] and 

specifically to gain insight into the percentage of referenced resources and content areas that 

were not made available to researchers through library funded subscriptions. 

 

Methods: Using Scopus, we identified papers published by the institution’s health sciences 

faculty in each of the previous 5 years. Papers co-authored by researchers at other institutions 

were excluded in order to focus the analysis solely on information resources available to 

scholars at the target institution. The citations from the resulting set of publications were 

extracted to spreadsheets, where they were subjected to a data normalization process. 

Incomplete or obviously erroneous references were removed. The remaining set of citations 

was sorted alphabetically by journal title, then secondarily by citation year. Using a combination 

of data sources, including publisher entitlement reports, catalog records, and previously 

downloaded holdings reports, we compared each citation to the library’s collection at year of 

http://www.mlanet.org/p/cm/ld/fid=938


Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           40                                                                                

 

citation to determine if access to the cited resource was provided and paid for by the library.  

 

Results: Published literature authored by University of Utah health sciences faculty between 

2012 and 2016 yielded 119,794 citations for analysis.  The libraries had print or electronic 

access to 99,298 (82.89%) of these cited resources.  Another 9,220 (7.7%) were accessible from 

open access platforms, leaving only 11,084 (9.25%) citations that needed to be obtained from 

other sources, such as interlibrary loan, pay-per-view, or illegitimate sites such as Sci-Hub. Of 

the cited, but not provided, literature, 26% comes from backfile content whereas 74% comes 

from more recently published work. Identified collection gaps include the disciplines of 

Neurology, Cardiology, and Oncology. 

 

Conclusion: A comprehensive evaluation of health sciences author citations over a 5-year period 

demonstrated that the vast majority were available from library-funded resources, thereby 

suggesting that the library’s collection has been adequately meeting the needs of researchers 

and scholars. This study provides valuable insight into faculty information-seeking behaviors 

and has implications for future collection development, service offerings, and funding priorities 

within the library.  Further study is needed to explore correlations between library-funded 

access to cited resources and other university metrics such as faulty recruitment and grant 

funding, as well as to investigate purported Sci-Hub activity in light of our findings. 

 

2nd Place 
Authors: Joanne Marshall, AHIP, FMLA, Research Professor, School of Information and Library 

Science Chapel Hill, NC; Amber Wells, Doctoral Graduate, Dept of Sociology, Chapel Hill, NC; 

Kathel Dunn, Associate Fellowship Program Director, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, 

MD; Joyce Backus, Associate Director for Library Operations, National Library of Medicine, 

Bethesda, MD 

Title: The Role of MEDLINE in Patient Care: Results of a Secondary Analysis of the Value of 

Libraries Study 

Abstract: 

Objectives: What role does the MEDLINE database play in relation to other information 

resources that are available to health care providers? What is the role of MEDLINE in positively 

impacting patient care? Since health care providers use multiple information resources in 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           41                                                                                

 

providing patient care, what is the specific role of MEDLINE? 

 

Methods: A previous survey on the use of health information resources for patient care 

obtained 16,122 responses from 56 hospitals in the U.S. and Canada. The study asked 

respondents to indicate resources used in answering specific clinical questions. On average, 

respondents reported using 3.5 resources to answer their question. This analysis used advanced 

descriptive statistics and regression analysis to examine the specific information resources used 

and how they were used in combination with one another. The use of more resources was 

associated with more changes made to patient care and increased avoidance of adverse events. 

MEDLINE was more likely to be among the resources consulted than any other information 

resource except journals. The analysis reported in this paper provides new insights into how 

MEDLINE is used in conjunction with other resources to answer clinical questions. 

 

Results: Our additional analysis of the Value Study data found that MEDLINE and online journals 

were the two most frequently used information resources. Respondents reported using an 

average of 3.5 resources when seeking additional information related to a specific patient care 

decision making situation. Using more information resources was associated with improved 

clinical decision making and a higher probability of  making changes to patient care and 

avoiding adverse events. MEDLINE was most likely to be among the combinations of 

information resources used by physicians, residents and nurses.  

 

Conclusion: MEDLINE continues to be a key information resource for health care providers as 

they seek answers to patient care questions. The MEDLINE database is also used in the 

preparation of many other specialized health information resources and point of care 

information tools. Since health professionals use multiple information resources, libraries and 

librarians continue to have an important role in providing access to and supporting the use of a 

wide range of information tools.  

 

Honorable Mention 

Authors: Tanja Bekhuis, AHIP, Principal Scientist, TCB Research & Indexing LLC, Pittsburgh, PA 

Title: Training in Support of Data-Driven Research: A Qualitative Study of Library Workshops in 

Top National Institutes of Health-Funded and National Science Foundation-Funded Universities 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           42                                                                                

 

Abstract: 

Objectives: In an age of data-driven research and competitive funding, libraries help their 

patrons acquire new skills. To do so, some offer workshops about knowledge discovery, 

analysis, and management of various kinds of data. The primary objective of this qualitative 

study was to explore the nature of workshops offered by libraries to support data-driven 

research in top NIH- and NSF-funded universities. Additionally, we developed a catalog of 

workshops, and indexed the resources and thematic content. 

Methods: To identify top-funded universities, we used NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting 

Tools and the NSF Budget Internet Information System. From corresponding websites, we 

extracted information on 99 workshops offered by health sciences libraries (n=5) and main 

libraries (n=5) in schools funded by NIH and NSF, respectively. Workshop title, duration, and 

description were catalogued by library and source of federal funding for the university. We 

used NVivo 11 Pro (QSR International) for qualitative data analysis and TExtract® (TEXYZ) to 

semi-automate indexing the content of the catalog. Themes were first identified in textual 

patterns and then were refined by an analyst. Thematic overlap was described across funding 

source. Additionally, we identified themes unique to each subset. 

Results: Main libraries in NSF-funded schools offered 36% more workshops than health sciences 

libraries in NIH-funded schools (57 vs 42). Overall workshop duration ranged from 1 to 16 hours 

in a bimodal distribution (1st mode = 1 hour; 2nd mode = 3 hours). The distribution of duration 

for NSF schools differed from the NIH distribution. We identified 15 main themes 

overall: statistical programming and data visualization occurred most often, and finding funds 

for research and open science least often. Thematic distributions varied with funding source. 

For example, bioinformatics occurred most often in the NIH-funded subset and statistical 

programming in the NSF subset. For each subset, 20 most informative indexing terms were 

identified after sorting and discretizing into 7 quantiles. Top indexing terms included: data 

visualization, pathway analysis, and data management (NIH schools); data analysis, data 

management plan (DMP), and Python (NSF schools). 

 

Conclusion: A catalog of workshops organized by university funding source and library, along 

with 2 indexes (resource and subject), will be publicly available. The analytical results, as well as 

index content, yield insights regarding workshop coverage. Implications for strategic planning 

and development of library workshops in support of data-driven research will be discussed. 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           43                                                                                

 

 

Contributed Posters 
 

1st Place 
Authors: Angela Spencer, Manager, C. Alan McAfee MD Medical Library, Chesterfield, MO; 

Elizabeth Laera, Medical Librarian, Brookwood Baptist Health, Birmingham, AL; Halyna 

Liszczynskyj, Director, Library Services, St. Elizabeth Medical Center, Utica, NY; Louise 

McLaughlin, Information Specialist, Woman's Health Sciences Library, Baton Rouge, LA; Kathy 

Zeblisky, Medical Library Manager, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, AZ 

Title: Solo Librarians: Demographics, Duties, Needs, and Challenges 

Abstract: 

Objective: To obtain data on how many librarians classify themselves as solo librarians within a 

medical/hospital setting.  Solo librarians constantly face challenges to maintain and expand 

services vital to their users.  By quantifying their number and needs, a stronger voice can be 

developed. 

 

Methods: A ten question survey using SurveyMonkey was sent to various medical library 

related listservs of interest to solo librarians. 

 

Results: 383 surveys were returned, the majority from hospital and academic librarians.  Other 

settings include clinics, organizations, research institutions and Veteran’s institutions.  Duties 

showed the variety of hats a solo can wear.  Duties included: reference, interlibrary loan, 

teaching, committee work, website development, marketing, creating policies/procedures, 

writing grants, archives, informatics and other work.  The “best challenges” question was the 

most insightful into what the needs are for solos.  Major challenges included: funding/budget, 

awareness/visibility, time management, value/ROI/proving your worth, staffing, space, 

promotion/marking/outreach, professional development, technology and organizational 

mergers. 

 

Discussion: The full survey results quantify the size of the solo librarian population, and the 

contributions and challenges they face working in solo settings.  This data can contribute useful 

information to discussions on best ways to support, educate, inform and advocate for this 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           44                                                                                

 

population. 

 

Conclusion/Next Steps: Solo Librarians are faced with similar financial, marketing and 

operational challenges regardless of setting. We hope to encourage peers to share their 

challenges and concerns and work with NN/LM and MLA to educate them about solo librarians’ 

needs and concerns so that we can sustain our future. 

2nd Place 
Authors: Nicole Theis-Mahon, Liaison to the School of Dentisty & HSL Collections Coordinator, 

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN; Shanda Hunt, Public Health Library Liaison & Data 

Curation Specialist, Health Sciences Libraries, Minneapolis, MN 

Title: My Doctor Said What!? Identifying and Assessing Online Health Information Resources 

Abstract: 

Objectives: Health information consumers look to the Internet to find answers to questions 

about their health or that of a loved one. We conducted a study to identify where individuals 

find online health information, how they use it, and what they think is missing. Results from this 

study are being used to make recommendations of how to improve services to this population. 

 

Methods: The University of Minnesota Health Sciences Libraries conducted a cross-sectional 

study of adults in August 2016. The survey instrument was adapted from the eHealth Literacy 

Scale (eHEALS) and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13), administered electronically on 

tablets at the Minnesota State Fair, and took approximately six minutes to complete. 

Convenience sampling yielded a total of 281 participants. Analysis of descriptive statistics and 

statistics to explore relationships between variables were conducted using R, and a qualitative 

analysis of one survey item was conducted using NVivo.  

 

Results/Conclusion: Preliminary results show that a majority of participants use a search engine, 

such as Google, WebMD, or the Mayo Clinic website, to locate online health information. While 

most respondents were confident in their ability to evaluate the health resources they find 

online, only half identified indicators of quality health information. This result was confounded 

by the high number of participants who were health providers. Participants identified 

personalization of and interactivity with health websites as highly desirable. 

 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           45                                                                                

 

Honorable Mention 
Authors: Hannah Norton, Interim Fackler Director, Associate University Librarian, University of 

Florida, Gainesville, FL; Mary Edwards, Reference & Liaison Librarian, Health Science Center 

Library, Gainesville, FL; Ariel Pomputius, Health Sciences Liaison Librarian, Health Science 

Center Library, Gainesville, FL; Michele Tennant , Interim Fackler Director, Health Science 

Center Libraries, Gainesville, FL 

Title: Tracking Tech Trends: Studying Patron Technology Use through Annual Surveying 

Abstract: 

Objectives: At an academic health sciences library serving students, faculty, and staff across a 

wide variety of disciplines, studying library patrons’ technology use, particularly in areas of 

mobile technology, provides necessary information on intersection points for library 

services.  Administering a similar survey annually for five years generates a holistic view of 

patrons’ technology needs and preferences over time. 

 

Methods: Beginning in 2012, the University of Florida (UF) Health Science Center Library (HSCL) 

began administering a 16-question survey designed by the University of Southern California 

Norris Medical Library to address technology use of health professional students and faculty 

and their interest in related library services.  For three years we participated in a multi-

institution implementation of this survey; when the collaboration ended, we continued to 

administer the survey at UF. While some questions have been modified over time for clarity or 

changes in available technology, many are consistent across the five years of survey 

implementation, allowing analysis of trends over time in use of specific technologies and 

service needs at our institution.  

 

Results: Smartphone ownership among survey respondents is nearly universal (ranging from 

87.6% to 95.7% over the past 5 years), and a majority of respondents also own a tablet (from 

51.1% to 70.2%).  While respondents were likely to check library hours, use medical apps, and 

use library electronic resources from their smartphone or tablet, they reported being unlikely 

to friend or follow the library on Facebook or Twitter or send a call number from the 

catalog.  One simple change implemented in response to survey results was to add the library’s 

hours to the “Quick Links” portion of the library’s website; while the hours are featured on 

other parts of the site, the Quick Links are the most prominent portion of the site’s mobile 

version.  Likewise, when survey data indicated that respondents were highly interested in 



Research Section Spotlight 

 

   

Hypothesis, vol. 29, no. 2, Fall/Winter 2017                                                                           46                                                                                

 

training on mobile device apps, the HSCL developed a stand-alone workshop entitled “Mobile 

Resources for Health.”  Trends that have not yet been explored further include respondents’ 

preference for print books for both academic (53.1% to 57.3%) and leisure (53.2% to 55.2%) 

reading, as compared to ebooks. 

 

Conclusions: Annual review of survey results has led to incremental changes in services 

offered.  Reviewing the aggregate data allows for more strategic consideration of future 

directions, with implications towards marketing the library’s resources, training development, 

and service development. 

--- 


