Deconstructing Cancer Patient Information Seeking in a Consumer Health Library Toward Developing a Virtual Information Consult for Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers: A Qualitative, Instrumental Case Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients and their caregivers want information about their disease and are interested in finding health information online. Despite the abundance of cancer information online, it is often fragmented, its quality is highly variable, and it can be difficult to navigate without expert-level knowledge of the cancer system. The Patient & Family Library at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre offers a broad collection of high-quality cancer health information and staff are available to help patrons refine their questions and explore information needs that they may not have considered. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research study was to deconstruct patrons' information-seeking behaviors in the library to assess the feasibility of replicating the services provided in the library through a Web app, extending the service beyond the walls of the cancer centre. The specific aims of this research were to understand (1) how patrons approach information seeking in the library (interface design), (2) how patrons communicate their informational needs (information categorization and metadata requirements), and (3) what resources are provided to address the patrons' information needs (collection development). METHODS: We employed a qualitative, instrumental case study to deconstruct patrons' health information-seeking behavior. The study population included patients, the librarian, and library volunteers. Ethnographic observation was conducted at the library over 3 days and key informant interviews with library staff were conducted to address the first aim. A closed card-sorting activity was conducted to address the second aim and the library shift logs and Search Request Forms (SRFs) were reviewed to address the third aim. RESULTS: A total of 55 interactions were recorded during the ethnographic observation and nine semistructured interviews were conducted during the key informant interviews. Seven library patron personas were identified: (1) Newbie, (2) Seasoned, (3) Direct, (4) Window Shopper, (5) Collector, (6) Information Seeker, and (7) Distressed. A total of 83 participants completed the closed card-sorting exercise. The participants' conceptual clusters within the similarity matrix overlapped with the groupings created by the librarian, with a few differences. A total of 161 entries in the library shift log and 65 SRFs were analyzed to determine what resources were given to patrons. Most resources that patrons received were available online (61%), although almost half of these required special access (47%). CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest it is possible to replicate library functions in a Web app with a few exceptions that cannot be replicated online. These elements include access to journal articles or other content behind paywalls and the librarian's ability to encourage further discussion through empathy and active listening. Discussion with the librarian could serve to refine and predict needs through observing information seekers and to provide immediate connection to spiritual care and psychosocial support for patrons in distress.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,014 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».