ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2013
"You're just one of the group when you're embedded": report from a mixed-method investigation of the research-embedded health librarian experience.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Needs assessment for improving library support for dentistry researchers.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2019Article
- Emerging roles of health information professionals for library and information science curriculum development: a scoping review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
- "You're just one of the group when you're embedded": report from a mixed-method investigation of the research-embedded health librarian experience.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEmbedded librarianship has received much attention in recent years. A model of embeddedness rarely discussed to date is that of research-embedded health librarians (REHLs). This study explores the characteristics of Canadian REHLs and the situations in which they are employed.
methodsThe authors employed a sequential, mixed-method design. An online survey provided descriptive statistics about REHLs' positions and work experiences. This informed a series of focus group interviews that expanded upon the survey. Through constant comparison, we conducted qualitative descriptive analysis of the interviews.
resultsBased on twenty-nine survey responses and four group interviews, we created a portrait of a "typical" REHL and discovered themes relevant to REHL work. REHLs may identify more strongly as researchers than as librarians, with corresponding professional needs and rewards. REHLs value "belonging" to the research team, involvement in full project lifecycles, and in-depth relationships with nonlibrarian colleagues. Despite widely expressed job satisfaction, many REHLs struggle with isolation from library and information science peers and relative lack of job security.
conclusionsREHLs differ from non-embedded health librarians, as well as from other types of embedded librarians. REHLs' work also differs from just a decade or two ago, prior to widespread Internet access to digital resources. IMPLICATIONS: Given that research-embedded librarianship appears to be a distinct and growing subset of health librarianship, libraries, master's of library and information science programs, and professional associations will need to respond to the support and education needs of REHLs or risk losing them to the health research field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.