Tracking the Impact of Changes to a Provincial Library Service Model: The Results of Two Satisfaction Surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Introduction: Alberta Health Services (AHS) was created in 2009, merging 12 former health regions and three provincial health authorities. Library services that had previously operated independently across the province were amalgamated into a single provincial entity, Knowledge Resource Service (KRS). A survey of library services was conducted in 2011. Subsequent to that survey, the provincial library service underwent major changes, which culminated in the launch of a provincial library website in August 2013. Another survey was conducted in 2014 to determine the impact of these changes. Methods: AHS staff and physicians were surveyed in 2011 and 2014 using an electronic survey tool. The survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the results reported as percentages. Results: This paper addresses the questions that are comparable between the two surveys. There were 1195 responses to the 2011 survey and 721 to the 2014 survey. Respondents in 2014 had less difficulty accessing the library website. Additionally, more respondents reported that using library resources prevented the occurrence of adverse events, from 13% in 2011 to 36% in 2014. Discussion: The drop in respondents reporting difficulties accessing information via the library website suggests that the new service model is effective in removing access barriers, enhancing the effectiveness of information resources for AHS staff and that the easier to find resources are helping to prevent adverse events.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".