Research Section Awards - De Groote, Lyon, Henner, and Kim Powell Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 42 HONORABLE MENTION Authors: Rick Wallace, AHIP – Assistant Director, Quillen College of Medicine Library; Nakia Woodward – Sr. Clinical Librarian, Quillen College of Medicine Library Title: Piecing Together the Mosaic of Rural Clinician Information Practices over a Twenty Year Period Abstract: Objectives: The purpose of this study is to determine how the information practices of rural clinicians in fifteen counties have changed over the last twenty years. This data is needed to design programs to meet the information needs of the population. Methods: This study is a longitudinal cross-sectional study. A validated survey methodology was used to gather data at a specific point in time. Physicians’ names were gathered from the state licensing verification database and librarians’ personal knowledge. Advanced practice and registered nurses were identified from a list from the state center for nursing. The questionnaires were sent by mail with a self-addressed stamped return envelope with a cover letter explaining the purpose of the survey. Returned surveys were accepted for a 6 week period. The physicians surveyed were the complete population of a fifteen county area and nurse/nurse practitioners were a random sample of the population. Previous iterations were done in 1998 and 2009. Results: In 1997, names of physicians and nurses in 17 rural Tennessee counties were obtained. A random sample (p=.05) was surveyed for a total of 707-(357 RNs and 350 MDs). In 2009, this exact procedure was replicated with slight adjustments to the survey instrument (477 RNs and 312 MDs=789). Eighteen percent (125) of the information questionnaires were returned in 1997. In 2009, sixteen percent (124) of usable surveys were returned. In 2015, one hundred thirty useful surveys were collected. Clinicians were measured as to information barriers, resources, access points, smartphone use, and practice demographics. Conclusions: We need to be out in the community improving access to health information. A longitudinal, cross-sectional study is a good methodology to map progress and trends. Making changes in the community is hard. Hospital purchases by large corporations affect outreach opportunities. Research Section Awards - De Groote, Lyon, Henner, and Kim Powell Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 43 BEST HOSPITAL PAPER/POSTER Authors: Sarah Sutton – Clinical Librarian, University Hospitals of Leicester Title: Has the Distribution and Role of Clinical Librarians in the United Kingdom Changed in the Last Ten Years? Abstract: Objectives: To establish if the number of Clinical Librarians (CLs) has changed over the eleven years since the first Clinical Librarian survey was conducted in 2004. To investigate whether newer roles such as Embedded Librarians or Informationists have been established. To see if there is geographical variation in such roles and to gain data to enable further networking of these post holders. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to the UK email discussion lists, also blogged and tweeted. The questionnaire was matched to the one used in 2004, so that trends could be identified. Results: The results of the questionnaire were analysed. In 2004 26 librarians responded to the original survey and identified themselves as working as CLs (although the actual job title may have been different) in 2015 47 respondents identified as CLs, with an additional 32 identifying as Outreach Librarians, 9 as Embedded Librarians and 2 as Informationists. The 2004 CLs were largely full time, with 92% in this category, in 2015 the split was 58% full time and 42% part time. Conclusions: Clinical Librarians have increased in numbers in the last ten years but so have other roles that mimic or build on the Clinical Librarian role. In 2004 Clinical Librarians were largely full time, in 2015 the part time roles have increased dramatically. A map will be included in the actual poster showing geographical distribution of the different roles. Research Section Awards - De Groote, Lyon, Henner, and Kim Powell Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 44 BEST JMLA RESEARCH PAPER (2014-2015) Authors: Julie M. Glanville, MSc, Associate Director; Steven Duffy, PgDip, Senior Information Consultant; Rachael McCool, BSc, Research Consultant; Danielle Varley, MSc, Research Assistant; York Health Economics Consortium, University of York,, United Kingdom Title: Searching ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to inform systematic reviews: what are the optimal search approaches? Citation: J Med Libr Assoc. 2014 Jul;102(3):177-83. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.007. Abstract: Background: Since 2005, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) member journals have required that clinical trials be registered in publicly available trials registers before they are considered for publication. Objectives: The research explores whether it is adequate, when searching to inform systematic reviews, to search for relevant clinical trials using only public trials registers and to identify the optimal search approaches in trials registers. Methods: A search was conducted in ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for research studies that had been included in eight systematic reviews. Four search approaches (highly sensitive, sensitive, precise, and highly precise) were performed using the basic and advanced interfaces in both resources. Results: On average, 84% of studies were not listed in either resource. The largest number of included studies was retrieved in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP when a sensitive search approach was used in the basic interface. The use of the advanced interface maintained or improved sensitivity in 16 of 19 strategies for Clinicaltrials.gov and 8 of 18 for ICTRP. No single search approach was sensitive enough to identify all studies included in the 6 reviews. Conclusions: Trials registers cannot yet be relied upon as the sole means to locate trials for systematic reviews. Trials registers lag behind the major bibliographic databases in terms of their search interfaces. Implications: For systematic reviews, trials registers and major bibliographic databases should be searched. Trials registers should be searched using sensitive approaches, and both the registers consulted in this study should be searched. Research Section Programs MLA16 - Marton and Ascher Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 45 TITLE Research Section Programs at MLA’16 AUTHORS Christine Marton Marie Ascher INTRODUCTION This year’s annual conference was co-organized by the Medical Library Association and the Canadian Health Libraries Association/ Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada. MOSAIC’16 was held in Toronto, Ontario at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. Although the weather was unseasonably cold, attendees enjoyed a wide range of programming and entertaining social events in downtown Toronto, Canada’s largest city and financial capital. The Research Section offered two section programs. The first program focused on systematic reviews and the role of the librarian while the second program focused on professional communication skills for presenting and publishing research. Beyond the Search was identified as one of the highest ranked conference programs in the July 7, 2016 issue of MLA-FOCUS. Beyond the Search: Expanding the Role of the Librarian in the Systematic Review Process Session Program 3 Monday, May 16, 2016 1:00 p.m.–2:25 p.m. Room 104C Moderator: Marie T. Ascher, Lillian Hetrick Huber Endowed Director, Health Sciences Library, New York Medical College–Valhalla Speakers: Marie T. Ascher, Margaret J. Foster, AHIP, Mark MacEachern, and Whitney A. Townsend Direct Link: http://eventscribe.com/2016/MLA/TwitterPres.asp?Pres=135613 http://eventscribe.com/2016/MLA/TwitterPres.asp?Pres=135613 Research Section Programs MLA16 - Marton and Ascher Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 46 Librarians are increasingly involved with systematic reviews, most frequently as creators of the exhaustive search strategy as recommended by the Institute of Medicine guidelines, and also as organizers, archivers, and writers of the search method component. In this session a distinguished panel of systematic review experts will present strategies and tools for expanding the role of the librarian "beyond the search," to the project and data management aspects of the next steps during systematic review process- selection, appraisal, and data extraction. This session will dispel the notion that librarians are only suited for the search component of the systematic review process by describing some of the methods to select and assess studies, extract data, and present results.. Topics that will be covered include: * Overall systematic review process * Quality assurance through project management principles * Screening and selection of studies, including how to calculate inter-rater agreement * Risk of bias assessment tools, focusing on validated tools * Data extraction tools and techniques * Presentation of results and archiving data The goal of this session is to provide participants with an increased understanding of these components to move forward to expanding their roles in the overall systematic review process. Professional Communication Skills: Publishing and Presenting Your Research Tuesday, May 17 3:00 p.m. - 4:25 p.m. Room 203D Moderator: Patrick McLaughlin Technical Information Specialist, MEDLARS MANAGEMENT SECTION, National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland Moderator: Ariel Deardorff Assessment and Data Management Librarian, NLM Associate Fellow, University of California, San Francisco, UCSF Library, San Francisco, California https://www.eventscribe.com/2016/MLA/SearchByKeyword.asp https://www.eventscribe.com/2016/MLA/SearchByKeyword.asp Research Section Programs MLA16 - Marton and Ascher Hypothesis, vol. 28, no. 1, Fall 2016 47 Speakers: Jacqueline Wirz, Natalie Clairoux, Joey Nicholson, Carole M. Gilbert, AHIP, FMLA, Cari Markley, and I. Diane Cooper, AHIP This program brings together leaders from the profession to share professional communication strategies. The session is divided into two communication areas: presentations and publishing. The presentation component focuses on how librarians can improve their presentation and public speaking skills. The publishing component focuses on how to write for publication, identify publication venues, and successfully navigate the publication process. The emphasis of this panel discussion is effective communication strategies for sharing information. Panelists include Jackie Wirz (Research Data Specialist, Oregon Health and Sciences University), Natalie Clairoux (Biomedical Librarian, University of Montreal / Université de Montréal), Joey Nicholson (Education and Curriculum Librarian, New York University Health Sciences Library), Diane Cooper (editor, Journal of the Medical Library Association), Carole Gilbert (editor, Journal of Hospital Librarianship), and Cari Merkley (co-editor, Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association / Journal de l’Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada). Metro Toronto Convention Centre, South Entrance, downtown Toronto