MLA News Selected Articles

April 2000

2000/2001 Priorities

Submitted by J. Michael Homan, AHIP, MLA President-Elect

Overall Theme: Promoting a Passion for the Profession—Keeping our Eyes on the Prize!
Our profession is undergoing profound change as a result of the positive advances in information technology. Our timeless professional values and ultimate societal worth remain as vital and important today in an increasingly electronic world, as they were when the association was founded more than 100 years ago, but our "value" is being challenged outside the profession and questioned inside the profession. As individual librarians and as a professional association, we need to periodically redefine and articulate a clear vision of health sciences librarianship focusing on its continuing high value to society and engendering a passion for the profession in its practitioners. Let’s keep our eyes on the "prize," quality information for improved health, and focus our energies on the strategies to achieve it.

Goal 1. Professional Development

• Develop a technology certification program, including a significant virtual component, in collaboration with academic partners, with a goal of certifying technical competence in literature evaluation and analysis, database development, analysis and display of statistical data, presentation skills, project management, Website construction, and topical areas important to members.
• Develop a technology specialization program, encompassing existing and planned MLA continuing education courses, offered in special tracks or clusters that address competence in the areas noted above.
• Develop tools and a training program to assist MLA members with effectively using the hospital library benchmarking data and Hay Associates salary study.

Goal 2. Advocacy

• Articulate and promote a clear vision of health sciences librarianship in the twenty-first century that is proactive and not reactive.
• Continuously, document through MLA’s public relations partner, PCI, and MLANET, how the provision of quality information can positively affect health.

Goal 3. Organization

• Engage the association at all levels in developing, articulating, and promoting a vision of the health sciences librarian in the twenty-first century.
• Capitalize on the passion for the profession and for libraries evident in the discussions about a potential name change for MLA, to help articulate a clear vision and best future for our members.

Goal 4. Research

• Use existing methodologies and organization or develop new infrastructure required to evaluate and publish the results of research presented at MLA annual meetings.
• Commission best practice reports and analytical studies, using data from the hospital benchmarking study and the Hay Associates salary study, that should be published and promoted to MLA’s advantage.
• Foster evidence-based librarianship and the judicious application of research results as a hallmark of the health information professional.
• Investigate funding strategies and selection criteria for an "MLA Fellow in Residence" program in a university setting capable of supporting research in system design, user interfaces, and other technological areas of interest to the advocacy and promotion of the profession.

Goal 5. National Information Policy

• Continue to use push technology via email to inform, educate, and solicit input from the membership on national information policy issues.
• Promote the use of the MLANET legislative action software to garner support for national issues of importance to MLA.
• Continue to promote an effective and assertive governmental relations program.

Goal 6. Information Technology

• Continue to build the MLA virtual association to overcome barriers, promote collaboration, attract new members, and serve as a model for the possibilities that abound in the networked environment.
• Develop and implement a plan to provide greater visibility to MLA’s best publishing, attract additional authors, compete with other publications, and refine MLA’s image in the networked environment through an electronic Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

Benchmarking Initiative

Submitted by Bernie Todd Smith, AHIP, Chair, MLA Benchmarking Task Force

In spring 1999, in response to numerous requests for benchmarking assistance from MLA members working in hospital libraries, the Benchmarking Task Force was appointed by the MLA Board. The task force charge is to define, develop, and evaluate a coordinated and comprehensive Web-based medical library benchmarking tool that will enable hospital libraries to establish best practices, compare important operations, and define appropriate statistics for negotiating with administrators. The task force first looked at recent benchmarking projects, then reviewed past relevant MLA panel presentations, papers, or posters, including a benchmarking project done by the North Atlantic Health Sciences Libraries Chapter. Benchmarking efforts of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) and the work of Joanne G. Marshall, Ph.D., AHIP, School of Library and Information Science, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, and the Canadian Health Library Association (CHLA) were also used as resources in planning the initiative.

Determining Interest
During fall 1999 chapter meetings, task force members and MLA staff facilitated information sessions on benchmarking to determine levels of interest, commitment, and ability to participate among hospital libraries. A frequently asked questions (FAQ) sheet was developed and distributed. The benchmarking FAQ is posted in the members’ area of MLANET (ID# and password needed to access). Panels, open discussion, and benchmarking interest events were held at several chapter meetings. These events clearly showed that the need for benchmarking data was great. Hospital librarians are frequently asked to provide hospital administration with benchmarking data. Most other departments in hospitals are able to provide this data from various proprietary or professional, cooperative databases. The overwhelming message was to make this a front-burner initiative and to expedite the needed work to develop a benchmarking database.

During this time, at MLA headquarters, the members’ area of MLANET was in development. Subsequently, the task force determined that the member-only side of MLANET would be an appropriate place to establish a database where members could input benchmarking information and generate reports. A preliminary data collection tool was constructed and reviewed by many interested hospital librarians, as well as the task force. The beta-test period for the benchmarking database was set for spring 2000, when the members’ area of MLANET was to be ready. During winter and spring chapter meetings, many more members had the chance to review the benchmarking FAQ or preliminary versions of the collection tool.

Institutional Member Benefit
During the past association year, MLA has looked for ways to increase benefits to both individual and institutional members of the association. Who will be eligible to participate in the benchmarking project (i.e., contributing institutional data and generating custom reports) was a question from the earliest phase of this initiative. Because of the nature of the information to be included in the database (institution-specific, not individual librarian–specific), the task force decided that the benefit of free participation should be tied to the institution or hospital, not the individual librarian. After considerable discussion and deliberation, the board decided, at its February 2000 meeting, to make participation a benefit to libraries with an institutional membership in MLA.

Beta-testing of the database is now set for April. Institutional member libraries will contribute data, testing the collection tool and the Web access for clarity, ease, and relevance. The opening of the beta-test period will be announced via MLA-Focus. Benchmarking data collected during the beta-test will not be released—its sole purpose is to test the collection methodology. Formal launch of the benchmarking project will follow MLA/CHLA/ABSC 2000 and analysis of the beta-test results.

Currently, benchmarking chapter educators (BCEs) are being appointed for each chapter. BCEs will attend training sessions during MLA/CHLA/ABSC 2000 in Vancouver so they can act as benchmarking people, flashpoints, and project gurus for their chapters. Other information sessions are scheduled during MLA/CHLA/ABSC 2000. MLA members will hear more about this initiative at the first half of the Open Forum, which will be a discussion of "Better Practice Through Benchmarking" led by the Task Force Steering Committee.

Members of the MLA Benchmarking Task Force are Chair Bernie Todd Smith, AHIP, Werner Health Sciences Library, Rochester General Hospital, ViaHealth, Rochester, NY; Holly Shipp Buchanan, Ed.D., AHIP, Health Sciences Center Library, University of New Mexico–Albuquerque; Linda C. Butson, AHIP, Health Sciences Center Library, University of Florida–Gainesville; Jacqueline Donaldson Doyle, AHIP, Learning Resources and Continuing Medical Education, Banner Health Arizona, Phoenix; Rosalind F. Dudden, AHIP, Tucker Memorial Medical Library, National Jewish Medical and Research Center, Denver; Scott Garrison, Information Technology Services, Duke University Medical Center Library, Durham, NC; Carole M. Gilbert, AHIP, Helen L. DeRoy Medical Library, Providence Hospital and Medical Center, Southfield, MI; Gretchen A. Hallerberg, AHIP, Library Services Department, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland; Janice Kaplan, AHIP, Health Science Libraries, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT; Susan Schweinsberg Long, AHIP, Medical Library/Wagner Resource Center, Multicare Health System, Tacoma, WA; Debra C. Rand, AHIP, Health Sciences Library, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, NY; Elizabeth A. Reid, AHIP, Health Science Library, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto; James Shedlock, AHIP, Galter Health Sciences Library, Northwestern University, Chicago; and Kate Corcoran, MLA staff liaison.

MLA Board Takes Action

The MLA Board of Directors held its winter meeting in Chicago, IL, at the Summerfield Suites Hotel, February 3–5, 2000. Following is a summary of significant actions taken by the board and a list of issues currently being studied. The next MLA board meeting will be held May 3–4, 2000, in Vancouver at MLA/CHLA/ABSC 2000. All meetings of the MLA Board of Directors are open to members, with the exception of executive sessions, in which matters discussed could affect personal or institutional privacy. For further information, please contact MLA Executive Director Carla J. Funk, 312.419.9094.

Organizational Issues

• Approved the 2000 Business Plan and Budget.
• Approved formation of the Corporate Information Services Section.
• Approved change of name and purpose of the Medical School Libraries Section to Library Management and Leadership Section.
• Approved that participation in the MLA benchmarking initiative be a benefit of MLA institutional membership.
• Approved the policy portion of the first edition of the MLANET Policy and Procedure Manual.
• Approved 2000/2001 association priorities.

Advocacy

• Charged the MLA Mentoring Task Force with making recommendations and developing materials to assist health sciences librarians who have lost their jobs.
• Approved the MLA president’s exploration, with the AAHSL president and board, of jointly creating a position statement on the unique role of libraries in academic health centers.
• Endorsed the MLA Statement on Electronic Publishing as presented by the Governmental Relations Committee.
• Approved awards, grants, and scholarship winners as presented by the Awards and Grants and Scholarships Committees.

Topics Being Studied or Discussed by the Board

• Develop an overarching vision statement to be added to the strategic plan.
• Convert the BMLA into electronic form.
• Research initiatives including benchmarking, a study of the value of information services to the institution, and a study comparing the compensation and competencies of health sciences librarians with information technology professionals.
• Public relations efforts to support hospital libraries and librarians.
• Board self-evaluation.

Regenstrief Institute Medical Informatics Training Fellowship

Edited by Virginia A. Lingle, AHIP

Series coordinated by Trudy A. Gardner, Ph.D., Medical Informatics Section; Rush-Presbyterian St. Luke’s, Chicago

Submitted by Frances A. Brahmi, AHIP, Ruth Lilly Medical Library, Medical Informatics Section; Indiana University School of Medicine–Indianapolis

Editor’s Note: This article is part of a series written by members of the Medical Informatics Section.

In 1998, when NLM publicized sponsorship of an additional slot for a librarian to participate in an existing postdoctoral informatics training program, the Regenstrief Institute accepted the challenge. Designed primarily for clinicians as a two- to three-year fellowship, the Regenstrief experience was modified for a one-year librarian slot. I was very fortunate to be selected.

The program consisted of a classroom curriculum, journal club, works in progress, statistics course, and research project to be developed and implemented in conjunction with a mentor. The classroom sessions focused primarily on critical appraisal of research methods in the journal literature, grant writing, and other practical aspects of fellowship survival. In addition, special opportunities were made available. Three such opportunities were particularly valuable: a writing workshop, a professional development series, and the Stanford Course.

The writing workshop was unlike any I had ever attended. Two days in duration, the other attendees and I studied and analyzed writing samples with a focus on how structure affects content. By the end of the second day, we began to view writing from a different perspective—that of writing to the reader’s expectations and, in so doing, effectively conveying the content.

The professional development seminars consisted of a seven-part, twelve-hour series devoted to the subject of time management according to Stephen Covey; taking and analyzing our Meyers-Briggs tests; and discussing conflicting career demands and how to best resolve them. We received a memento for our efforts, and it has remained squarely on my desktop. It was a large lapel pin, which stated "Why Am I Here? The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing." Our instructor urged us to rethink why we were in the fellowship and to ask difficult questions of ourselves. One, in particular, that hit home was: "Do we accept assignments, goals, and objectives simply because we can accomplish them, or are we making consistent conscious choices, which are in keeping with our long-term goals?"

The third valuable opportunity, the Stanford Course, was a seven-session, twenty-one-hour course on teaching in a clinical setting. Each meeting featured a short didactic session followed by a video segment exemplifying the topic of the day. We discussed each example in terms of group dynamics, teaching strategies, and alternatives. We then participated in a mock clinical teaching scenario with assigned roles. Half of the fellows observed while the other half participated in videotaped role-playing. The resulting videotape was critiqued first by the participants and then by the observers. The scenario usually included a mix of an attending physician, a resident, and a student. As you might imagine, the players were assigned challenging roles—such as a disruptive resident, a sleeping or distracted student, or an overbearing resident—while the assigned attending physician attempted to apply the principles for facilitating learning that had just been discussed. Topics included were "Learning Climate," "Control of Session," "Communication of Goals," "Understanding and Retention," "Feedback," "Evaluation," and "Self-Directed Learning."

The Regenstrief informatics program is an exciting opportunity for collaborative learning and research. Interaction with other fellows from varying professional and cultural backgrounds has deepened my understanding of the interdisciplinary nature of health informatics. The experience has affirmed my conviction that we, as medical librarians, need to continue to build on our many strengths and forge bridges with our academic and community colleagues. As we do so, we will mutually enhance and enrich our collective possibilities.

For more information on the program, contact Kurt Kroenke, M.D., professor of medicine, Regenstrief Institute for Health Care, RG-6, 1001 West 10th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46202; 317.630.7447.

Using EndNote to Maintain Electronic Journals Lists

Submitted by Melissa L. Just, Health Sciences Library, Children’s Hospital, Los Angeles

With the proliferation of electronic journals, maintaining a Web page that provides links to these resources is becoming a full-time job. Ideally, the most useful way to create and maintain electronic journal lists is to develop a database that produces Web pages on the fly. However, many librarians have neither the expertise nor the hardware and software necessary to accomplish the task.

Luckily, there are other options. With a little knowledge of EndNote and hypertext markup language (HTML), librarians can create Web-ready journal lists in a variety of formats. EndNote is a personal bibliographic management software package—a database—typically used to maintain citations and create bibliographies and manuscripts with properly formatted endnotes. However, the program can easily be configured and used to maintain lists of electronic resources, and, with a little tweaking, can produce a "bibliography" of these resources in HTML format to publish on the Web.

The EndNote Record
Each record in an EndNote library (or file) is a citation to a journal article, book, or other bibliographic format. One of the formats available is "electronic source," which allows users to enter data in fields including title, year, keywords, type of medium, notes, and uniform resource locator (URL). Users can build a library of records for electronic journals that include these fields and define other fields specifically for their needs.

Sample record entry:
Title: Journal of Clinical Investigation
Year: 1996-
Custom 1: None
URL: http://www.jci.org/
Keywords: Medicine

In this example, the Custom 1 field is used to describe access limitations.

Creating Lists
EndNote libraries can both be sorted and searched. Sorting allows users to change the order of the records in the database (e.g., list alphabetically by title or keyword, or chronologically by subscription year). Searching will create a subset of records based on the search criteria. Using these features, it is easy to produce journal lists based on many criteria, including journal titles arranged alphabetically (AZ) or subsets (A–C, D–F, etc.), journals about specific subjects, or only journals with no access restrictions.

Creating HTML
Once sorted, EndNote allows the user to "publish" the citations in different bibliographic styles. Typically, EndNote users would publish bibliographies in APA, Chicago, or MLA format. However, because the styles are highly customizable, it is possible to publish the bibliography in a user-defined style, namely HTML.

Examples
A style with the following format

would produce a citation similar to the one below

Modifying a style to produce output in the desired format is possible.

would create output from our example above

Modifying the style by adding HTML coding can produce a customized list.

will produce in text format

Any text added to the style will be incorporated into the citation unless the word exactly matches a field name, in which case the data in that field is substituted.

The output when viewed on the Web would be

Publishing the library or a subset of the library will simply produce a series of records like the one above. The resulting list can be pasted into an HTML template that includes the standard HTML tags (html, head, body, etc.) and defines the look of the Web page.

For an example of an EndNote-created reference list based on the example above, visit hsc.usc.edu/~just/ejournals.html. For more information, contact Melissa Just.