ArticleDisaster medicine and public health preparedness2019
Implementation and Evaluation of the Value of Improved and Sustained Information Access by Library Expertise (VISIBLE) Program.
Article in Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo increase knowledge of National Library of Medicine resources by using a train-the-trainer approach.
methodsWorkshops were held in spring 2016 to increase knowledge of 4 National Library of Medicine tools. Data were collected before the workshop and immediately, 3 months, and 1 year after the workshop. Knowledge questions were scored as 1 point per question; an aggregated knowledge score could range from 0 to 16 points. A paired t test assessed the change in knowledge from before to after the workshop.
resultsFour workshops were hosted, with a total of 74 attendees. The response rate for the surveys ranged from 50% to 100%. Knowledge scores changed significantly from 7.2 to 11.9 (t = 15, P < .001). One year after the workshop, more of the participants reported having informally trained others (56.8%) than reported providing 1 or more formal training session (8.1%)(P < .001).
conclusionObjective measures of knowledge and information dissemination showed that the National Library of Medicine workshop was successful and resulted in both short- and long-term gains. This workshop could be repeated with other populations to further disseminate information regarding the National Library of Medicine tools, which could help improve disaster response.
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.