MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306906544 · doi:10.21900/j.alise.2022.1043

Connecting Research and Practice: Publication Patterns of LIS Faculty Who Teach Health-Related Courses

2022· article· en· W4306906544 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ALISE Annual Conference · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth Education and Validation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBibliometricsLibrary scienceSyllabusCurriculumAccreditationScholarshipCitationMedical educationDescriptive statisticsPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicinePedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bibliometrics studies of library and information science (LIS) faculty scholarly output have explored publication patterns in open access (Grandbois & Beheshti, 2014), health-gender and sexual orientation (Mehra & Tidwell, 2014), and other trends in LIS Research (Wusu & Lazarus, 2018). This study builds upon that literature by exploring the publication characteristics of full-time LIS faculty teaching health courses and the scholarship patterns of this underexplored group. This bibliometric analysis examined the connections between research and practice by examining publications from 2011 to 2021 by LIS faculty that teach health-related courses for library science programs in the United States and Canada. The data sources were located through searching course listings, faculty profiles, and syllabi from school websites and contacting deans and directors to identify full-time LIS faculty teaching health-related courses in American Library Association (ALA) accredited programs. The 29 LIS faculty that were identified through this process were contacted via email in September 2021, inviting them to voluntarily share their curriculum vitae (CVs) for analysis. The final sample of 21 CVs is comprised of the 16 faculty members who responded to the email invitation providing their CVs and five CVs that were publicly available online. The research team used descriptive bibliometrics to explore author, author order, year of publication, source, type of publication, etc. Insight and implications pertaining to connecting LIS faculty research, teaching health-related courses, and practice will be presented, as well as recommendations for future research directions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.236
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it