Medical Librarians may be Underutilised in EBM Training within Pediatric Resident Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Review of: Boykan, R., & Jacobson, R. M. (2017). The role of librarians in teaching evidence-based medicine to pediatric residents. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 105(4), 355-360. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2017.178 Abstract Objective – To identify the use and role of medical librarians in pediatric residency training, specifically in the teaching of evidence-based medicine (EBM) to medical residents. This research also aims to describe current strategies used for teaching evidence-based medicine in pediatric residency training programs. Design – Web-based survey. Setting – Pediatric residency programs within the United States of America. Subjects – 200 members of the Association of Pediatric Program Directors (APPD). Methods – The 13-question, web-based survey used multiple choice and short answer questions to ask how pediatric residency programs used medical librarians. The survey collected demographic information such as program name, geographic region, and program size. Where respondents indicated their programs utilised librarians, the survey asked about their specific role, including involvement in EBM curricula. For respondents who indicated their programs did not use librarians, the survey asked about their reasons for not doing so, and to describe their EBM curricula. Researchers used SPSS software to analyse the quantitative data. Main Results – Overall 91 (46%) APPD-member program directors responded to the online survey. Of these, 76% of program directors indicated a formal EBM curriculum in their residency programs. Medical librarians were responsible for teaching EBM in 37% of responding pediatric programs. However, only 17% of responding program directors stated that medical librarians were involved in teaching EBM on a regular basis. The EBM skills most commonly taught within the pediatric residency programs included framing questions using PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome), searching for relevant research literature, and critical appraisal of studies. The strategies reported as most effective for teaching EBM in pediatric residency training programs were journal clubs, regular EBM conferences or seminars, and ‘morning reports.’ Conclusion – The study concluded that medical librarians may be important in the teaching of EBM in pediatric residency programs, but are likely underutilised. The librarian might not be seen has having a significant role in forums such as journal clubs, despite these being a predominant venue for EBM teaching. The authors recommend that program directors and faculty work together to better integrate medical librarians’ expertise into clinical teaching of EBM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".