Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.286Keywords:
Program Evaluation, Medical Libraries, Learning, Systematic Reviews, Library Science, Professional Role, Professionalism, Information Services, Evidence-Based Practice, International Cooperation, Experiential LearningAbstract
Objectives: The Medical Library Association (MLA) Systematic Review Project aims to conduct systematic reviews to identify the state of knowledge and research gaps for fifteen top-ranked questions in the profession. In 2013, fifteen volunteer-driven teams were recruited to conduct the systematic reviews. The authors investigated the experiences of participants in this large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to answering priority research questions and fostering professional growth among health sciences librarians.
Methods: A program evaluation was conducted by inviting MLA Systematic Review Project team members to complete an eleven-item online survey. Multiple-choice and short-answer questions elicited experiences about outputs, successes and challenges, lessons learned, and future directions. Participants were recruited by email, and responses were collected over a two-week period beginning at the end of January 2016.
Results: Eighty (8 team leaders, 72 team members) of 198 potential respondents completed the survey. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated that the MLA Systematic Review Project should be repeated in the future and were interested in participating in another systematic review. Team outputs included journal articles, conference presentations or posters, and sharing via social media. Thematic analysis of the short-answer questions yielded five broad themes: learning and experience, interpersonal (networking), teamwork, outcomes, and barriers.
Discussion: A large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to performing systematic reviews shows promise as a model for answering key questions in the profession and demonstrates the value of experiential learning for acquiring synthesis review skills and knowledge. Our project evaluation provides recommendations to optimize this approach.References
Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester, England, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
Cooper ID, Crum JA. New activities and changing roles of health sciences librarians: a systematic review, 1990–2012. J Med Libr Assoc. 2013 Oct;101(4):268–77. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3163/1536-5050.101.4.008.
Murphy SA, Boden C. Benchmarking participation of Canadian university health sciences librarians in systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Apr;103(2):73–8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.2.003.
Beverley CA, Booth A, Bath PA. The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study. Health Inf Libr J. 2003 May;20(2):65–74.
Booth A, Sutton A, Falzon L. Working together: supporting projects through action learning. Health Inf Libr J. 2003 Nov;20(4):225–31.
Grefsheim SF, Rankin JA, Perry GJ, McKibbon KA. Affirming our commitment to research: the Medical Library Association’s research policy statement: the process and findings. J Med Libr Assoc. 2008 Apr;96(2):114–20. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.96.2.114.
Medical Library Association. The research imperative: creating the health knowledgebase [Internet]. Chicago, IL: The Association; 2007 [cited 18 May 2018]. <http://www.mlanet.org/page/the-research-imperative-creating-the-health-information-knowledgebase>.
Harris M, Holmes H, Ascher M, Eldredge J. Inventory of research questions identified by the 2011 MLA research agenda delphi study. Hypothesis. 2013 Winter;24(2):5–16.
Eldredge JD, Harris MR, Ascher MT. Defining the Medical Library Association research agenda: methodology and final results from a consensus process. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009 Jul;97(3):178–85. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.3.006.
Eldredge JD, Ascher MT, Holmes HN, Harris MR. The new Medical Library Association research agenda: final results from a three-phase delphi study. J Med Libr Assoc. 2012 Jul;100(3):214–8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.012.
Eldredge JD, Ascher MT, Holmes HN, Harris MR. The research mentor: top-ranked research questions and systematic reviews. Hypothesis. 2013 Winter;24(2):19–20.
Koufogiannakis D, Slater L, Crumley E. A content analysis of librarianship research. J Inf Sci. 2004 Jun;30(3):227–39.
Crumley E, Koufogiannakis D. Developing evidence-based librarianship: practical steps for implementation. Health Inf Libr J. 2002 Jun;19(2):61–70.
Eldredge JD, Holmes HN, Ascher MT. Moving the EBLIP community’s research agenda forward. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract. 2015;10(2):170–3.
Ascher MT, Eldredge JD, Holmes HN, Harris M. MLA research agenda: appraising the best available evidence [Internet]. 2012 Nov [cited 18 May 2018]. <http://digitalrepository.unm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1032&context=hslic-publications-papers>.
Eldredge JD, Ascher MT, Holmes HN. An innovative model of evidence-based practice for other professions. J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Apr;103(2):100–2. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.2.009.
Perrier L, Farrell A, Ayala AP, Lightfoot D, Kenny T, Aaronson E, Allee N, Brigham T, Connor E, Constantinescu T, Muellenbach J, Epstein HA, Weiss A. Effects of librarian-provided services in healthcare settings: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Nov–Dec;21(6):1118–24. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002825.
Ascher MT, Eldredge JD. MLA Research Section’s Research Agenda Committee systematic review project: a status report. Hypothesis. 2017 Spring/Summer;29(1):5–17.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006 Jul;3(2):77–101.
Madden A, Collins P, McGowan S, Stevenson P, Castelli D, Hyde L, DeSanto K, O’Brien N, Purdon M, Delgado D. Demonstrating the financial impact of clinical libraries: a systematic review. Health Inf Libr J. 2016 Sep;33(3):172–89.
Swanberg SM, Dennison CC, Farrell A, Machel V, Marton C, O’Brien KK, Pannabecker V, Thuna M, Holyoke AN. Instructional methods used by health sciences librarians to teach evidence-based practice (EBP): a systematic review. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jul;104(3):197–208. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.004.
Mumford A. Effective learners in action learning sets. Empl Couns Today. 1996;8(6):3–10.
Eldredge JD. Virtual peer mentoring (VPM) may facilitate the entire EBLIP process. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract. 2010;5(1):7–16.
Fyfe T, Dennett L. Building capacity in systematic review searching: a pilot program using virtual mentoring. J Can Health Libr Assoc. 2012;33(1):12–6.
Lorenzetti DL, Powelson SE. A scoping review of mentoring programs for academic librarians. J Acad Librar. 2015 Mar;41(2):186–96.
Ritchie A, Genoni P. Mentoring in professional associations: continuing professional development for librarians. Health Libr Rev. 1999 Dec;16(4):216–25.
Giles G. Report on accreditation learning sets in the West Midlands region of the NHS. Health Inf Libr J. 2000 Dec;17(4):181–8.
Eldredge JD, Ascher MT, Holmes HN, Harris MR. The new Medical Library Association research agenda: final results from a three-phase delphi study. J Med Libr Assoc. 2012 Jul;100(3):214–8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.100.3.012.
