Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28539305›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2017

Deconstructing Cancer Patient Information Seeking in a Consumer Health Library Toward Developing a Virtual Information Consult for Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers: A Qualitative, Instrumental Case Study.

Janet Papadakos, Aileen Trang, Alaina B Cyr, Nazek Abdelmutti, Meredith E Giuliani, Michelle Snow, Tara McCurdie, Menaka Pulandiran, Sara Urowitz, David Wiljer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Identifying gaps in consumer health library collections: a retrospective review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Janet PapadakosCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6320-4156
Aileen TrangCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3493-435X
Alaina B CyrCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2908-0521
Nazek AbdelmuttiCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6448-7810
Meredith E GiulianiCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1827-5590
Michelle SnowCancer Education Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0549-0868
Tara McCurdieHealth Care Human Factors, Techna Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7700-702X
Menaka PulandiranDepartment of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9931-5103
Sara UrowitzCanadian Cancer Research Alliance, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2362-9958
David WiljerEducation, Technology & Innovation, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2748-2658
University Health Network · CACanadian Cancer Society · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer patients and their caregivers want information about their disease and are interested in finding health information online. Despite the abundance of cancer information online, it is often fragmented, its quality is highly variable, and it can be difficult to navigate without expert-level knowledge of the cancer system. The Patient & Family Library at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre offers a broad collection of high-quality cancer health information and staff are available to help patrons refine their questions and explore information needs that they may not have considered.

objectiveThe purpose of this research study was to deconstruct patrons' information-seeking behaviors in the library to assess the feasibility of replicating the services provided in the library through a Web app, extending the service beyond the walls of the cancer centre. The specific aims of this research were to understand (1) how patrons approach information seeking in the library (interface design), (2) how patrons communicate their informational needs (information categorization and metadata requirements), and (3) what resources are provided to address the patrons' information needs (collection development).

methodsWe employed a qualitative, instrumental case study to deconstruct patrons' health information-seeking behavior. The study population included patients, the librarian, and library volunteers. Ethnographic observation was conducted at the library over 3 days and key informant interviews with library staff were conducted to address the first aim. A closed card-sorting activity was conducted to address the second aim and the library shift logs and Search Request Forms (SRFs) were reviewed to address the third aim.

resultsA total of 55 interactions were recorded during the ethnographic observation and nine semistructured interviews were conducted during the key informant interviews. Seven library patron personas were identified: (1) Newbie, (2) Seasoned, (3) Direct, (4) Window Shopper, (5) Collector, (6) Information Seeker, and (7) Distressed. A total of 83 participants completed the closed card-sorting exercise. The participants' conceptual clusters within the similarity matrix overlapped with the groupings created by the librarian, with a few differences. A total of 161 entries in the library shift log and 65 SRFs were analyzed to determine what resources were given to patrons. Most resources that patrons received were available online (61%), although almost half of these required special access (47%).

conclusionsThe study findings suggest it is possible to replicate library functions in a Web app with a few exceptions that cannot be replicated online. These elements include access to journal articles or other content behind paywalls and the librarian's ability to encourage further discussion through empathy and active listening. Discussion with the librarian could serve to refine and predict needs through observing information seekers and to provide immediate connection to spiritual care and psychosocial support for patrons in distress.

Indexed as

consumer health informationhealth literacyinformation-seeking behaviorInternetpatient education

Identifiers

PMID28539305
PMCPMC5463052
OpenAlexW2619453278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.