SPI-Hub™: a gateway to scholarly publishing information.

BACKGROUND: Advances in the health sciences rely on sharing research and data through publication. As information professionals are often asked to contribute their knowledge to assist clinicians and researchers in selecting journals for publication, the authors recognized an opportunity to build a decision support tool, SPI-Hub: Scholarly Publishing Information Hub™, to capture the team's collective publishing industry knowledge, while carefully retaining the quality of service. CASE PRESENTATION: SPI-Hub's decision support functionality relies on a data framework that describes journal publication policies and practices through a newly designed metadata structure, the Knowledge Management Journal Record™. Metadata fields are populated through a semi-automated process that uses custom programming to access content from multiple sources. Each record includes 25 metadata fields representing best publishing practices. Currently, the database includes more than 24,000 health sciences journal records. To correctly capture the resources needed for both completion and future maintenance of the project, the team conducted an internal study to assess time requirements for completing records through different stages of automation. CONCLUSIONS: The journal decision support tool, SPI-Hub, provides an opportunity to assess publication practices by compiling data from a variety of sources in a single location. Automated and semi-automated approaches have effectively reduced the time needed for data collection. Through a comprehensive knowledge management framework and the incorporation of multiple quality points specific to each journal, SPI-Hub provides prospective users with both recommendations for publication and holistic assessment of the trustworthiness of journals in which to publish research and acquire trusted knowledge.

Why equating all evidence searches to systematic reviews defies their role in information seeking.

All too often the quality and rigor of topic investigations is inaccurately conveyed to information professionals, resulting in a mischaracterization of the research, which, if left unchecked and published, may in turn mislead potential readers. Accurately understanding and categorizing the types of topic investigation searches that are requested of information professionals is critical to both meeting requestors' needs and reflecting their intended methodological approaches. Information professionals' expertise can be an invaluable resource to guide users through the investigative and publication process.

Guiding Oncology Patients Through the Maze of Precision Medicine.

As the role of genomics in health care grows, patients increasingly require adequate genetic literacy to fully engage in their care. This study investigated a model for delivering consumer-friendly genetic information to improve understanding of precision medicine using health literacy and learning style principles. My Cancer Genome (MCG), a freely available cancer decision support tool, was used as a testbed. MCG content on a melanoma tumor mutation, BRAF V600E, was translated to a 6th-grade reading level, incorporating multiple learning modalities. A total of 90 patients and caregivers were recruited from a melanoma clinic at an academic medical center and randomized to 3 groups. Group A (control) received an exact copy of text from MCG. Group B was given the same content with hyperlinks to videos explaining key genetic concepts, identified and labeled by the team as knowledge pearls. Group C received the translated content with the knowledge pearls embedded. Changes in knowledge were measured through pre and post questionnaires. Group C showed the greatest improvement in knowledge. The study results demonstrate that providing information based on health literacy and learning style principles can improve patients' understanding of genetic concepts, thus increasing their likelihood of taking an active role in any decision making concerning their health.

Evaluating a Large Language Model's Ability to Answer Clinicians' Requests for Evidence Summaries.

Objective: This study investigated the performance of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool using GPT-4 in answering clinical questions in comparison with medical librarians' gold-standard evidence syntheses. Methods: Questions were extracted from an in-house database of clinical evidence requests previously answered by medical librarians. Questions with multiple parts were subdivided into individual topics. A standardized prompt was developed using the COSTAR framework. Librarians submitted each question into aiChat, an internally-managed chat tool using GPT-4, and recorded the responses. The summaries generated by aiChat were evaluated on whether they contained the critical elements used in the established gold-standard summary of the librarian. A subset of questions was randomly selected for verification of references provided by aiChat. Results: Of the 216 evaluated questions, aiChat's response was assessed as "correct" for 180 (83.3%) questions, "partially correct" for 35 (16.2%) questions, and "incorrect" for 1 (0.5%) question. No significant differences were observed in question ratings by question category (p=0.39). For a subset of 30% (n=66) of questions, 162 references were provided in the aiChat summaries, and 60 (37%) were confirmed as nonfabricated. Conclusions: Overall, the performance of a generative AI tool was promising. However, many included references could not be independently verified, and attempts were not made to assess whether any additional concepts introduced by aiChat were factually accurate. Thus, we envision this being the first of a series of investigations designed to further our understanding of how current and future versions of generative AI can be used and integrated into medical librarians' workflow.

Using SPI-Hub™ to Promote the Key Role of Prepublishing in Healthcare.

With the need to quickly advance knowledge dissemination in rapid-paced fields, and more recently in response to the urgency of the COVID-19 pandemic, prepublishing has been brought to the forefront. SPI-Hub™, a publicly available journal selection decision support tool, is being strategically enhanced to address prospective authors' critical needs in navigating and selecting the most appropriate preprint or traditional publication venue.

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

OBJECTIVES: The United States transitioned to the tenth version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system (ICD-10) for mortality coding in 1999 and to the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification and Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-CM/PCS) on October 1, 2015. The purpose of this study was to conduct a narrative literature review to better understand the impact of the implementation of ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched English-language articles in PubMed, Web of Science, and Business Source Complete and reviewed websites of relevant professional associations, government agencies, research groups, and ICD-10 news aggregators to identify literature on the impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS transition. We used Google to search for additional gray literature and used handsearching of the references of the most on-target articles to help ensure comprehensiveness. RESULTS: Impact areas reported in the literature include: productivity and staffing, costs, reimbursement, coding accuracy, mapping between ICD versions, morbidity and mortality surveillance, and patient care. With the exception of morbidity and mortality surveillance, quantitative studies describing the actual impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation were limited and much of the literature was based on the ICD-10-CM/PCS transition rather than the earlier conversion to ICD-10 for mortality coding. DISCUSSION: This study revealed several gaps in the literature that limit the ability to draw reliable conclusions about the overall impact, positive or negative, of moving to ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS in the United States. CONCLUSION: These knowledge gaps present an opportunity for future research and knowledge sharing and will be important to consider when planning for ICD-11.

Exploring clinician adoption of a novel evidence request feature in an electronic medical record system.

OBJECTIVE: The research evaluated strategies for facilitating physician adoption of an evidence-based medicine literature request feature recently integrated into an existing electronic medical record (EMR) system. METHODS: This prospective study explored use of the service by 137 primary care physicians by using service usage statistics and focus group and survey components. The frequency of physicians' requests for literature via the EMR during a 10-month period was examined to explore the impact of several enhanced communication strategies launched mid-way through the observation period. A focus group and a 25-item survey explored physicians' experiences with the service. RESULTS: There was no detectable difference in the proportion of physicians utilizing the service after implementation of the customized communication strategies (11% in each time period, P=1.0, McNemar's test). Forty-eight physicians (35%) responded to the survey. Respondents who had used the service (n=19) indicated that information provided through the service was highly relevant to clinical practice (mean rating 4.6, scale 1 "not relevant"-5 "highly relevant"), and most (n=15) reported sharing the information with colleagues. CONCLUSION: The enhanced communication strategies, though well received, did not significantly affect use of the service. However, physicians noted the relevance and utility of librarian-summarized evidence from the literature, highlighting the potential benefits of providing expert librarian services in clinical workflow.

Providing evidence-based answers to complex clinical questions: evaluating the consistency of article selection.

PURPOSE: Health care providers must maintain familiarity with current biomedical evidence, but clinicians struggle to maintain their awareness of current research because of the demands of daily practice and the exponential growth of medical knowledge. Clinical information specialists (informationists), trained experts in reviewing and filtering the medical literature in response to complex clinical queries, may be able to assist practicing clinicians. This study compared informationists and two categories of physicians in their article selection in response to two complex clinical questions. METHOD: The study was performed at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. A total of 15 faculty and staff from three groups were recruited (five general physicians, five physicians trained in research methodology, and five informationists). The participants reviewed two previously selected clinical questions, worked in focus groups to define the pertinent facet questions of the questions, and then ranked the articles by pertinence to the clinical questions. RESULTS: In general, both informationists and physicians trained in research methodology had a high degree of intergroup agreement for ranking article pertinence, while the generalists were less likely to agree on pertinent articles. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that informationists consistently select articles relevant to answering complex clinical queries and may assist practicing clinicians by providing information relevant to patient cases.

Using knowledge management practices to develop a state-of-the-art digital library.

Diffusing knowledge management practices within an organization encourages and facilitates reuse of the institution's knowledge commodity. Following knowledge management practices, the Eskind Biomedical Library (EBL) has created a Digital Library that uses a holistic approach for integration of information and skills to best represent both explicit and tacit knowledge inherent in libraries. EBL's Digital Library exemplifies a clear attempt to organize institutional knowledge in the field of librarianship, in an effort to positively impact clinical, research, and educational processes in the medical center.

Evidence-based databases versus primary medical literature: an in-house investigation on their optimal use.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to investigate the effectiveness of evidence-based medicine (EBM) resources in providing evidence for complex clinical questions versus general care management questions to identify situations for their optimal use. METHODS: In this investigation, forty complex clinical questions were randomly selected from an in-house archival database of questions received by librarians during clinical rounds. An additional forty questions were selected from a list of general care management questions received by the library from Pathways teams. To measure the effectiveness of resources in answering the questions, a team of librarians was asked to search UpToDate, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and HealthGate Clinical Guidelines (formerly, EBM Solutions). The team then established consensus on whether a question was fully or partially answered by one of the above-mentioned EBM resources and was instructed to record the instances in which the primary literature needed to be used to answer the question completely. RESULTS: The study found that the EBM resources completely answered 20.0% of the 40 complex clinical questions and 47.5% of the 40 general care management questions, partially answered 40.0% of the complex clinical questions and 22.5% of the general care management questions, and did not answer 40.0% of the complex clinical questions and 30.0% of the general care management questions. CONCLUSION: The pervasive use of EBM resources in answering clinical questions is making it imperative for information specialists to develop an expertise on their appropriate use. By exploring their use in answering complex clinical questions and general care management questions, this paper underlines the strengths and weakness of EBM resources and provides information specialists with some basic knowledge about how these resources can be combined with the primary literature to strengthen their effectiveness.

A power information user (PIU) model to promote information integration in Tennessee's public health community.

Observation and immersion in the user community are critical factors in designing and implementing informatics solutions; such practices ensure relevant interventions and promote user acceptance. Libraries can adapt these strategies to developing instruction and outreach. While needs assessment is typically a core facet of library instruction, sustained, iterative assessment underlying the development of user-centered instruction is key to integrating resource use into the workflow. This paper describes the Eskind Biomedical Library's (EBL's) recent work with the Tennessee public health community to articulate a training model centered around developing power information users (PIUs). PIUs are community-based individuals with an advanced understanding of information seeking and resource use and are committed to championing information integration. As model development was informed by observation of PIU workflow and information needs, it also allowed for informal testing of the applicability of assessment via domain immersion in library outreach. Though the number of PIUs involved in the project was small, evaluation indicated that the model was useful for promoting information use in PIU workgroups and that the concept of domain immersion was relevant to library-related projects. Moreover, EBL continues to employ principles of domain understanding inherent in the PIU model to develop further interventions for the public health community and library users.

Information in context: integrating information specialists into practice settings.

An information need (the problem) cannot be divorced from its context. The problem context determines the urgency, granularity of detail, authority, and level of certainty required for an acceptable answer and dictates the expertise and resources that can be brought to bear. The size and diversity of the sources that can be marshalled during clinical problem solving is cognitively unmanageable--too large and too complex for a single person to process effectively in a constrained timeframe. Can the clinical team, as currently constituted, collectively handle this information-processing task, or is there a need for special information expertise on the team? If there is such a need, what is the best way to prepare information specialists to participate in context-based problem solving? This article explores preparation for work in information-rich, problem-solving environments. The authors provide two case studies, one clinical and one bioscientific, that elucidate knowledge and training requirements for information specialists who work as peers in patient care and research settings.

A model for training the new bioinformationist.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to examine the effectiveness of a curriculum designed to increase bioinformatics competencies of librarians with diverse backgrounds and to identify demographic factors that may affect the learning process. METHODS: Sixteen professional staff participated in a 12-week training course consisting of 5 distinct modules: molecular biology, genetic analysis, biotechnology, research literature, and databases. Participants completed a 120-question pretest and an 88-question posttest designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the training. RESULTS: Training was deemed successful as all participants scored higher on the posttest than the pretest. Data analysis was conducted in relation to participant background. Holding a biology degree did not seem to affect posttest results. Years of experience, however, had an impact on final scores in the databases section, as senior team members had greater difficulty learning the material. DISCUSSION: As the need for specialized information in the area of molecular biology and genetics becomes more central for the effectiveness of organizations, it is crucial for libraries to quickly align with those needs by having a clear vision for increasing the skills and competencies of their staff in this subject area. This paper describes an effective model for learning that was developed and tested by the Eskind Biomedical Library.