ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2023
Theoretical issues in medical library and information sciences' articles published in scopus and web of science databases: A scoping review.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2023. 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.
- Academic visibility, trends, and emerging patterns of Peruvian university professors of health sciences with the highest number of theses: A scientometric analysis.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nowadays, professions with stronger theoretical background usually have a better standing among other academic fields. The field of Medical Library and Information Science (MLIS) also requires developments in theoretical issues to increase its ranking and provide more effective support services and higher quality research. The aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review of publications in MLIS in Scopus and Web of Sciences databases to identify the underlying theoretical issues in this field. The research method was a scoping review conducted in February 2022. Articles published in the field of MLIS for which the main theme or research outcomes were based on theoretical foundations, patterns, frameworks, theories and models, and without limitation on time were retrieved from Web of Science and Scopus databases. The retrieved articles were analyzed after necessary screening and evaluation. Based on the determined criteria, 49 articles were eventually analyzed. Patterns, theories, frameworks, and models used in the articles have been categorized into six general groups: (1) information (general) and information literacy; (2) models of evaluation and support services in libraries and information centers; (3) clinical, embedded librarianship, and professional librarianship; (4) scientometrics, selection and evaluation of articles, journals, and serials; (5) open access content; and (6) psychological and sociological models. The results indicate that published articles in the field of MLIS have used a considerable range of models, theories, and frameworks as the most important elements of theoretical concepts. These models, theories, and frameworks have been categorized into six main groups, a number of which have been involving collection development, organization of material, and most have been overseeing the distribution of information and support services in libraries and information centers. Whereas MLIS is an interdisciplinary field with specific applications for access to and distribution of information, it still has considerable potential for presenting models, frameworks, and theories.
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.