ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2019
Professional development in evidence-based practice: course survey results to inform administrative decision making.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Building capacity among health care librarians to teach evidence-based practice-an evaluation.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand librarians' evidence-based practice (EBP) professional development needs and assist library administrators with professional development decisions in their own institutions, the study team surveyed past participants of an EBP online course. This study aimed to (1) understand what course content participants found valuable, (2) discover how participants applied their course learning to their work, and (3) identify which aspects of EBP would be beneficial for future continuing education.
methodsThe study team distributed an eighteen-question survey to past participants of the course (2011-2017). The survey covered nontraditional demographic information, course evaluations, course content applications to participants' work, additional EBP training, and EBP topics for future CE opportunities. The study team analyzed the results using descriptive statistics.
resultsTwenty-nine percent of course participants, representing different library environments, responded to the survey. Eighty-five percent of respondents indicated that they had prior EBP training. The most valuable topics were searching the literature (62%) and developing a problem, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question (59%). Critical appraisal was highly rated for further professional development. Fifty-three percent indicated change in their work efforts after participating in the course. Ninety-seven percent noted interest in further EBP continuing education.
conclusionsSurvey respondents found value in both familiar and unfamiliar EBP topics, which supported the idea of using professional development for learning new concepts and reinforcing existing knowledge and skills. When given the opportunity to engage in these activities, librarians can experience new or expanded EBP work roles and responsibilities. Additionally, the results provide library administrators insights into the benefit of EBP professional development.
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.