Peer Review Week: Ask the Chefs
Interesting article from The Scholarly Kitchen on AI as it pertains to peer review.
|
|---|
|
|---|
Claiming CEs on MLA's New Website (1 min.)
I am sharing this here because it took me a while to figure out what to do on the new website. I thought others would have the same issues figuring out the "new logic" too.
Once you know what to do, it's not so bad ... There are a few extra steps and a different starting place from the old Medlib-Ed page.
Hello, health science librarians! This October, WiLS and the UW-Madison iSchool are joining forces to bring you a tech series that’s as groundbreaking as Frank Netter’s illustrations. Get ready to explore AI in libraries like never before!
Here’s what’s on the docket:
Grab the full series for just $150 (normally $200) if you're a WiLS member. And don’t miss the free October 17th webinar—open to all WiLS members!
**Ready to register?** Sign up for the full series here and use the discount link, or get your free pass for the October 17th session here. One registration per link, but feel free to register as many people as needed!
Not sure if your organization is a WiLS member? Check here or join for free! For questions, contact us at information@wils.org.
Let’s map out the future of libraries with AI—just like Frank Netter mapped out the human body!
Piecing Together Systematic Reviews. Phase 3: Production, an NNLM Webinar that took place on August 28, 2024.
Additional class materials can be found on the event page.
This session will cover the third phase of the PIECCESS review cycle, the Production phase of conducting a systematic review, during which the searches are completed. This will cover evaluating searches, translating between databases, deduplication, and grey literature.
The five-part series will introduce the review cycle framework, PIECCESS, as described in the book by Foster and Jewell (2022) Piecing Together Systematic Reviews and Other Evidence Syntheses. Throughout the phases, the potential roles for librarians, health care professionals and others interested in the process of systematic review will be discussed as well as categories of client, such as those who read reviews as compared to those who conduct reviews.
Speaker Information
Margaret Foster, MS, MPH, is the Evidence Synthesis and Scholarly Communication Librarian and the Head of the Center for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses at the Medical Sciences Library, Texas A&M University. She is the co-author of the first book written on systematic reviews for librarians- Assembling the Pieces of a Systematic Review: A Guide for Librarians (2017) and recently Piecing Together Systematic Reviews and Other Evidence Syntheses (2022). She received the Presidential Impact Award from Texas A&M University in 2018 and the Lucretia W. McClure Excellence in Education Award in 2024 from the Medical Library Association.
This presentation meets the NNLM goal to work through libraries and other members to support a highly trained workforce for biomedical and health information resources and data, improve health literacy, and increase health equity through information.
Despite MLA taking place in spring, I've always thought that fall felt like conference season. To that end, here are a few upcoming library and library-related conferences you might be interested in.
Remember that WHSLA is offering a second $500 Professional Development award in 2024. To be eligible you must submit your name for the drawing by Friday, September 13, 2024 at noon. For more on eligibility requirements, see Dora's WHSLA email from Thursday, Sept 5.
Midwest Chapter MLA (virtual)
Wisconsin Library Association (Green Bay, WI)
Charleston Conference (virtual and Charleston, SC)
.jpg)
WHSLA member Kellee Selden and Ascension Librarian, Lucinda Bennett presented a poster and lightning talk at MLA-24 on the topic of Recycling Old Hospital Library Print Collections.
Watch for an upcoming WHSLA Wisdom Chat on the topic later this fall. In the meantime, check out the poster above to get some ideas and inspiration for recycling your old print collections. [Click on the poster for a larger view.] All that paper doesn't have to go to a landfill!
If you've worked with Nurses or nursing students on searching the literature, you may have encountered some of the strict parameters -- esp. the 5-year rule or nurse-as-author -- where they won't accept anything older, even if that's when the bulk of the research was done, and the question is considered settled. Even though databases like CINAHL allow us the functionality to use those limits, it may zero out useful results.
The lead author, Eleanor Truex is an Ascension Medical Librarian working in the Chicago area.
The five-year rule must die. Despite an extensive literature search, the
origins of the five-year rule remain unknown. In an era when the nursing
profession is so focused on evidence-based practice, any approach that
arbitrarily limits literature searches to articles published in the previous
five years lacks scientific basis. We explore some reasons for the
pervasiveness of the practice and suggest that librarians need to engage
with nursing faculty, who are well-positioned to be change agents in this
practice.
Keywords: 5-year Rule; Date Limits; Date Range; Literature Searches;
Nurses; Nursing Education; Nursing Faculty; Nursing Research; Search LimitsHere is the previous article published on this project:
Exploring the Use of Common Strict Search Criteria in Nursing Literature Searches. Truex ES, Spinner E, Hillyer J, Ettien A, Wade S, Calhoun C, Wolf G, Hedreen R, Heimlich L, Nickum A, Vonderheid SC. Nurse Educ. 2022 Dec 30. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000001353. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36728635. Link to Article.
