Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29339930›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2018

Research evaluation support services in biomedical libraries.

Karen Elizabeth Gutzman, Michael E Bales, Christopher W Belter, Thane Chambers, Liza Chan, Kristi L Holmes, Ya-Ling Lu, Lisa A Palmer, Rebecca C Reznik-Zellen, Cathy C Sarli and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Alignment of library services with the research lifecycle.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors.

Karen Elizabeth Gutzman
Michael E Bales
Christopher W Belter
Thane Chambers
Liza Chan
Kristi L Holmes
Ya-Ling Lu
Rebecca C Reznik-Zellen
Cathy C Sarli
Amy M Suiter
Terrie R Wheeler

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The paper provides a review of current practices related to evaluation support services reported by seven biomedical and research libraries. Methods: A group of seven libraries from the United States and Canada described their experiences with establishing evaluation support services at their libraries. A questionnaire was distributed among the libraries to elicit information as to program development, service and staffing models, campus partnerships, training, products such as tools and reports, and resources used for evaluation support services. The libraries also reported interesting projects, lessons learned, and future plans. Results: The seven libraries profiled in this paper report a variety of service models in providing evaluation support services to meet the needs of campus stakeholders. The service models range from research center cores, partnerships with research groups, and library programs with staff dedicated to evaluation support services. A variety of products and services were described such as an automated tool to develop rank-based metrics, consultation on appropriate metrics to use for evaluation, customized publication and citation reports, resource guides, classes and training, and others. Implementing these services has allowed the libraries to expand their roles on campus and to contribute more directly to the research missions of their institutions. Conclusions: Libraries can leverage a variety of evaluation support services as an opportunity to successfully meet an array of challenges confronting the biomedical research community, including robust efforts to report and demonstrate tangible and meaningful outcomes of biomedical research and clinical care. These services represent a transformative direction that can be emulated by other biomedical and research libraries.

Indexed as

Interdisciplinary CommunicationBiomedical ResearchCanadaHumansLibrariansLibraries, MedicalLibrary ServicesLibrary SurveysLibrary Technical ServicesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID29339930
PMCPMC5764574

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.