• The activist health sciences librarian

      Perry, Gerald Jerry; Univ Arizona, Univ Arizona Lib (MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOC, 2020-01-01)
      At the remove of 2019, it is hard for many to imagine the sense of apocalypse that was palpable throughout the gay community during the 1980s and much of the 1990s. My professional career was launched at the height of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) pandemic, and at the time, saving lives through librarianship was my mission. This Janet Doe Lecture presents my personal story of activism and advocacy as a lens through which to consider the larger story of activism around social justice issues for the Medical Library Association, by groups such as the Relevant Issues Section, now the Social Justice Section, and by the work of past Doe Lecturers Rachael K. Anderson, AHIP, FMLA, and Gerald Oppenheimer. It is also the story of an association that has at times been deeply conflicted about the role of such activism in our niche of librarianship. With anchors in poetry and prose, this is a story of hope through justice, conveying a message of the essentialness of our work as librarians and health information professionals to the mission of saving lives.
    • Evaluating nursing faculty's approach to information literacy instruction: a multi-institutional study

      McGowan, Bethany S.; Cantwell, Laureen P.; Conklin, Jamie L.; Raszewski, Rebecca; Wolf, Julie Planchon; Slebodnik, Maribeth; McCarthy, Sandra; Johnson, Shannon; Univ Arizona, Hlth Sci Lib (MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOC, 2020-07)
      Objective: In 2018, the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) Health Sciences Interest Group convened a working group to update the 2013 Information Literacy Competency Standards for Nursing to be a companion document to the 2016 Framework for Information Literacy in Higher Education. To create this companion document, the working group first needed to understand how nursing faculty approached information literacy (IL) instruction. Methods: The working group designed a survey that assessed how nursing faculty utilized IL principles in coursework and instruction. The survey consisted of nineteen mixed methods questions and was distributed to nursing faculty at eight institutions across the United States. Results: Most (79%) faculty indicated that they use a variety of methods to teach IL principles in their courses. While only 12% of faculty incorporated a version of the ACRL IL competencies in course design, they were much more likely to integrate nursing educational association standards. Faculty perceptions of the relevance of IL skills increased as the education level being taught increased. Conclusion: The integration of IL instruction into nursing education has mostly been achieved through using standards from nursing educational associations. Understanding these standards and understanding how faculty perceptions of the relevance of IL skills change with educational levels will guide the development of a companion document that librarians can use to collaborate with nurse educators to integrate IL instruction throughout nursing curriculums at course and program levels.
    • Evaluation of drug information resources for interactions between therapeutic drugs and drugs of abuse

      Beckett, Robert D; Martin, Jennifer R; Stump, Curtis D; Dyer, Megan A; Univ Arizona, Hlth Sci Lib (MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOC, 2020-10)
      A cross-sectional evaluation study was conducted focusing on seven resources: Clinical Pharmacology, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Lexicomp Online, Micromedex, Drug Interactions Analysis and Management, Drug Interaction Facts, and Stockley's Drug Interactions. A sample of clinically relevant interactions was developed through review of tertiary literature and resources, and input was solicited from subject matter experts. Entries from each resource for each interaction were evaluated for scope (i.e., whether there was an entry for the interaction); completeness (i.e., whether there was information addressing mechanism; clinical effects, severity, course of action, and level of certainty, described as a median rating on a 5-point scale); and consistency (i.e., whether the information in the resource was similar to the majority) among resources with an entry.
    • Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

      Patel, Risha I.; Beckett, Robert D.; University of Arizona College of Pharmacy (MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOC, 2016-10)
      Objective: The research sought to evaluate seven drug information resources, specifically designed for analyzing drug interactions for scope, completeness, and ease of use, and determine the consistency of content among the seven resources. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted where 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed using 7 drug information resources: Lexicomp Interactions module, Micromedex Drug Interactions, Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Stockley's Drug Interactions (10th edition), Drug Interactions Analysis and Management (2014), and Drug Interaction Facts (2015). The interaction sample was developed based on published resources and peer input. Two independent reviewers gathered data for each interaction from each of the 7 resources using a common form. Results: Eighty-two drug-drug and 18 drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed. Scope scores were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (97.0%), Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report (97.0%), and Micromedex Drug Interactions (93.0%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Overall completeness scores were higher for Micromedex Drug Interactions (median 5, interquartile range [IQR] 4 to 5) compared to all other resources (p<0.01 for each comparison) and were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), Facts & Comparisons eAnswers (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), and Drug Interaction Facts (4, IQR 4 to 5) compared to all other resources, except Micromedex (p<0.05 for each comparison). Ease of use, in terms of time to locate information and time to gather information, was similar among resources. Consistency score was higher for Micromedex (69.9%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Conclusions: Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Lexicomp Interactions, and Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest in scope. Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest in completeness. Consistency scores were overall low, but Micromedex Drug Interactions was the highest.
    • Sidecar Learning: a new e-learning platform for librarians

      Mery, Yvonne; Univ Arizona, Univ Arizona Lib (MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOC, 2020-10)
      This article describes how two librarians at the University of Arizona created a new e-learning tool, Sidecar Learning, and implemented tutorials aimed at health sciences students and researchers. Librarians at the University of Arizona have used these interactive tutorials to reach thousands of students. Sidecar Learning was created to provide librarians with a scalable means of teaching thousands of students how to use complicated library databases.