Improving LibGuides at a Health Sciences Library: A Case Study.

While LibGuides are widely used in libraries to curate resources for users, there are a number of common problems, including maintenance, design and layout, and curating relevant and concise content. One health sciences library sought to improve our LibGuides, consulting usage statistics, user feedback, and recommendations from the literature to inform decision making. Our team recommended a number of changes to make LibGuides more usable, including creating robust maintenance and content guidelines, scheduling regular updates, and various changes to the format of the guides themselves to make them more user-friendly.

Prioritization of Randomized Clinical Trial Questions for Children Hospitalized With Common Conditions: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: There is a lack of randomized clinical trial (RCT) data to guide many routine decisions in the care of children hospitalized for common conditions. A first step in addressing the shortage of RCTs for this population is to identify the most pressing RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. Objective: To identify the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this consensus statement, a 3-stage modified Delphi process was used in a virtual conference series spanning January 1 to September 29, 2022. Forty-six individuals from 30 different institutions participated in the process. Stage 1 involved construction of RCT questions for the 10 most common pediatric conditions leading to hospitalization. Participants used condition-specific guidelines and reviews from a structured literature search to inform their development of RCT questions. During stage 2, RCT questions were refined and scored according to importance. Stage 3 incorporated public comment and feasibility with the prioritization of RCT questions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was RCT questions framed in a PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcome) format and ranked according to importance and feasibility; score choices ranged from 1 to 9, with higher scores indicating greater importance and feasibility. Results: Forty-six individuals (38 who shared demographic data; 24 women [63%]) from 30 different institutions participated in our modified Delphi process. Participants included children's hospital (n = 14) and community hospital (n = 13) pediatricians, parents of hospitalized children (n = 4), other clinicians (n = 2), biostatisticians (n = 2), and other researchers (n = 11). The process yielded 62 unique RCT questions, most of which are pragmatic, comparing interventions in widespread use for which definitive effectiveness data are lacking. Overall scores for importance and feasibility of the RCT questions ranged from 1 to 9, with a median of 5 (IQR, 4-7). Six of the top 10 selected questions focused on determining optimal antibiotic regimens for 3 common infections (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and cellulitis). Conclusions and Relevance: This consensus statementhas identified the most important and feasible RCT questions for children hospitalized with common conditions. This list of RCT questions can guide investigators and funders in conducting impactful trials to improve care and outcomes for hospitalized children.

Design and implementation of a massive open online course on enhancing the recruitment of minorities in clinical trials - Faster Together.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic minorities are often underrepresented in clinical trials, threatening the generalizability of trial results. Several factors may contribute to underrepresentation of minorities in clinical trials, including lack of training for researchers and staff on the importance of diversity in clinical trials and effective strategies for recruiting and retaining minority populations. METHODS: Applying community engaged research principles, we developed a massive open online course (MOOC) to help research team members develop knowledge and skills to enhance the recruitment of minorities in clinical trials. A transdisciplinary working group, consisting of clinical researchers, community engagement specialists, minority clinical trial recruitment and retention educators and specialists, and knowledge management information scientists, was formed to develop an evidence-based curriculum. Feedback from the Recruitment Innovation Center Community Advisory Board was incorporated to help finalize the curriculum. The course was implemented in Coursera, an online learning platform offering MOOCs. A bootstrap paired sample t-test was used to compare pre- and post-assessments of knowledge, attitudes, and intentions as it relates to minority recruitment. RESULTS: The final course, entitled Faster Together, was divided into eight 1-h modules. Each module included video presentations, reading assignments, and quizzes. After 10 months, 382 individuals enrolled in the course, 105 participants completed the pre-test, and 14 participants completed the post-test. Participants' knowledge scores were higher with an increase in the mean number of correct answers from 15.4 (95% CI:12.1-18.7) on the pre-test to 18.7 (95% CI:17.42-20.2) on the post-test. All post-test respondents (n = 14) indicated that the course improved their professional knowledge, and 71.4% of respondents indicated that they were very likely to make changes to their recruitment practices. CONCLUSIONS: Faster Together, a massive open online course, is an acceptable, accessible approach to educating research teams on minority recruitment in clinical trials. Preliminary evidence indicates the course increased knowledge on how to recruit minorities into clinical trials and could promote change in their recruitment practices.

Why equating all evidence searches to systematic reviews defies their role in information seeking.

All too often the quality and rigor of topic investigations is inaccurately conveyed to information professionals, resulting in a mischaracterization of the research, which, if left unchecked and published, may in turn mislead potential readers. Accurately understanding and categorizing the types of topic investigation searches that are requested of information professionals is critical to both meeting requestors' needs and reflecting their intended methodological approaches. Information professionals' expertise can be an invaluable resource to guide users through the investigative and publication process.

Collection of social determinants of health in the community clinic setting: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Addressing social and behavioral determinants of health (SBDs) may help improve health outcomes of community clinic patients. This cross-sectional study explored how assessing SBDs can be used to complement health data collection strategies and provide clinicians with a more in-depth understanding of their patients. METHODS: Adult patients, ages 18 and older, at an urban community health care clinic in Tennessee, U.S.A., were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding health status, health history and SBDs while waiting for their clinic appointment. The SBD component included items from the National Academy of Medicine, the Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patient Assets, Risks, and Experiences instrument, and the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking. Data collection and analysis occurred in 2017. RESULTS: One hundred participants completed the study. The questionnaire took approximately 11 min to complete, and the response rate was 90% or higher for all items except annual household income (unanswered by 40 participants). The median number of negative SBDs was 4 (IQR 2.75-7.0), 96 participants had at least one unmet need, and the most common negative SBD was physical activity (75%; 75/100). CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid questionnaire provided insight into a community clinic population's SBDs and allowed for a more complete understanding than a single questionnaire alone. The brief questionnaire administration time and low non-response rate support the questionnaire's feasibility in the community clinic setting, and results can be used by clinicians to further the personalization goals of precision medicine. Next steps include evaluating how to connect patients with appropriate resources for addressing their SBDs.