It takes longer than you think: librarian time spent on systematic review tasks.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: The authors examined the time that medical librarians spent on specific tasks for systematic reviews (SRs): interview process, search strategy development, search strategy translation, documentation, deliverables, search methodology writing, and instruction. We also investigated relationships among the time spent on SR tasks, years of experience, and number of completed SRs to gain a better understanding of the time spent on SR tasks from time, staffing, and project management perspectives.A confidential survey and study description were sent to medical library directors who were members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries as well as librarians serving members of the Association of American Medical Colleges or American Osteopathic Association.Of the 185 participants, 143 (77%) had worked on an SR within the last 5 years. The number of SRs conducted by participants during their careers ranged from 1 to 500, with a median of 5. The major component of time spent was on search strategy development and translation. Average aggregated time for standard tasks was 26.9 hours, with a median of 18.5 hours. Task time was unrelated to the number of SRs but was positively correlated with years of SR experience.The time required to conduct the librarian's discrete tasks in an SR varies substantially, and there are no standard time frames. Librarians with more SR experience spent more time on instruction and interviews; time spent on all other tasks varied widely. Librarians also can expect to spend a significant amount of their time on search strategy development, translation, and writing.
Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20180401 2
<h4>Introduction</h4>The authors examined the time that medical librarians spent on specific tasks for systematic reviews (SRs): interview process, search strategy development, search strategy translation, documentation, deliverables, search methodology writing, and instruction. We also investigated relationships among the time spent on SR tasks, years of experience, and number of completed SRs to gain a better understanding of the time spent on SR tasks from time, staffing, and project manageme ...[more]
Project description:At the Northern General Hospital, there are sixteen medical wards, spread over approximately half a mile. Weekend care for inpatients on these wards is provided by a team of four junior doctors, of different levels of training. We undertook a quality improvement project to reduce the amount of time junior doctors spent performing routine tasks at weekends. This may increase their available time for direct patient care. The study was performed over a period of nine weeks on two medical wards - Diabetes & Endocrine (W1) and Care of the Elderly Rehabilitation (W2). We monitored the bleeps received by the covering junior doctors during the weekend daytime shifts from the two study wards. We noted that a proportion of bleeps were routine tasks that could have been performed during weekday working hours. We also noted that W2 recorded fewer bleeps than W1 ward. This seemed to be because W2 batched junior doctors' jobs together. Firstly, we attempted to reduce the amount of routine work left undone each weekend. We provided a poster to remind Junior Doctors to complete such work during the week. Secondly, on W1 we replicated the job-batching system already in place on W2. A Doctors' Book was introduced in which nursing staff recorded the tasks that needed doing. This saved them from having to bleep the doctor repeatedly. The two changes resulted in a reduction in the number of bleeps generated by each ward and the number of visits required by the Junior Doctors to W1. Simple changes can reduce the amount of time junior doctors spend performing routine work at weekends. We implemented two such changes and achieved a reduction in the number of bleeps experienced by junior doctors and the number of times they had to return to one ward.
Project description:BackgroundChanges in the health system in Western countries have increased the scope of the daily tasks assigned to physicians', anesthetists included. As already shown in other specialties, increased non-clinical burden reduces the clinical time spent with patients.MethodsThis was a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted in 6 public and private hospitals in France. The primary endpoint was the evaluation by an external observer of the time spent per day (in minutes) by anesthetists on clinical tasks in the operating room. Secondary endpoints were the time spent per day (in minutes) on non-clinical organizational tasks and the number of task interruptions per hour of work.ResultsBetween October 2017 and April 2018, 54 anesthetists from six hospitals (1 public university hospital, two public general hospitals and three private hospitals) were included. They were followed for 96 days corresponding to 550 hours of work. The proportion of overall clinical time was 62% (58% 95%CI [53; 63] for direct care. The proportion of organizational time was higher in public hospitals (11% in the university hospital (p < 0.001) and 4% in general hospitals (p < 0.01)) compared to private hospitals (1%). The number of task interruptions (1.5/h ± 1.4 in all hospitals) was 4 times higher in the university hospital (2.2/h ± 1.6) compared to private hospitals (0.5/h ± 0.3) (p < 0.05).ConclusionsMost time in the operating room was spent on clinical care with a significant contrast between public and private hospitals for organizational time.
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effects of librarian-provided services in healthcare settings on patient, healthcare provider, and researcher outcomes.Materials and methodsMedline, CINAHL, ERIC, LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to June 2013. Studies involving librarian-provided services for patients encountering the healthcare system, healthcare providers, or researchers were eligible for inclusion. All librarian-provided services in healthcare settings were considered as an intervention, including hospitals, primary care settings, or public health clinics.ResultsTwenty-five articles fulfilled our eligibility criteria, including 22 primary publications and three companion reports. The majority of studies (15/22 primary publications) examined librarians providing instruction in literature searching to healthcare trainees, and measured literature searching proficiency. Other studies analyzed librarian-provided literature searching services and instruction in question formulation as well as the impact of librarian-provided services on patient length of stay in hospital. No studies were found that investigated librarians providing direct services to researchers or patients in healthcare settings.ConclusionsLibrarian-provided services directed to participants in training programs (eg, students, residents) improve skills in searching the literature to facilitate the integration of research evidence into clinical decision-making. Services provided to clinicians were shown to be effective in saving time for health professionals and providing relevant information for decision-making. Two studies indicated patient length of stay was reduced when clinicians requested literature searches related to a patient's case.
Project description:BackgroundSystematic reviews (SRs) are considered the highest level of evidence to answer research questions; however, they are time and resource intensive.ObjectiveWhen comparing SR tasks done manually, using standard methods, versus those same SR tasks done using automated tools, (1) what is the difference in time to complete the SR task and (2) what is the impact on the error rate of the SR task?MethodsA case study compared specific tasks done during the conduct of an SR on prebiotic, probiotic, and synbiotic supplementation in chronic kidney disease. Two participants (manual team) conducted the SR using current methods, comprising a total of 16 tasks. Another two participants (automation team) conducted the tasks where a systematic review automation (SRA) tool was available, comprising of a total of six tasks. The time taken and error rate of the six tasks that were completed by both teams were compared.ResultsThe approximate time for the manual team to produce a draft of the background, methods, and results sections of the SR was 126 hours. For the six tasks in which times were compared, the manual team spent 2493 minutes (42 hours) on the tasks, compared to 708 minutes (12 hours) spent by the automation team. The manual team had a higher error rate in two of the six tasks-regarding Task 5: Run the systematic search, the manual team made eight errors versus three errors made by the automation team; regarding Task 12: Assess the risk of bias, 25 assessments differed from a reference standard for the manual team compared to 20 differences for the automation team. The manual team had a lower error rate in one of the six tasks-regarding Task 6: Deduplicate search results, the manual team removed one unique study and missed zero duplicates versus the automation team who removed two unique studies and missed seven duplicates. Error rates were similar for the two remaining compared tasks-regarding Task 7: Screen the titles and abstracts and Task 9: Screen the full text, zero relevant studies were excluded by both teams. One task could not be compared between groups-Task 8: Find the full text.ConclusionsFor the majority of SR tasks where an SRA tool was used, the time required to complete that task was reduced for novice researchers while methodological quality was maintained.
Project description:BackgroundWorking time restraints; senior led care; and a reduction in 'out of hours' operating has resulted in less operating time for orthopaedic trainees in the United Kingdom. Therefore, there has been an attempt to overcome these challenges by implementing novel techniques. Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) focuses on the mental steps required to complete complex procedures. It has been used in training athletes and in general surgery but is new to orthopaedic training.AimTo undertake a systematic review to analyse if CTA is beneficial to train novice surgeons in common orthopaedic and trauma procedures.Materials and methodsA systematic review was performed evaluating CTA in trauma and orthopaedic surgery on MEDLINE and EMBASE. Search terms used were: 'Cognitive task', 'mental rehearsal' and 'Orthop*'']. 33 studies were originally identified. Duplicate studies were excluded (11). Articles not relating to Orthopaedic surgery were excluded (15). The CTA research ranking scale was used to evaluate the impact of the studies included.Results7 studies were identified as appropriate for inclusion. 264 participants. 178 M, 86F. All studies showed objective or subjective benefits from CTA in orthopaedic training when compared to traditional methods. The majority of the participants highlighted high subjective satisfaction with the use of the CTA tools and reported that they proved to be excellent adjuncts to the traditional apprenticeship model.ConclusionCTA learning tools have demonstrated significant objective and subjective benefits in trauma and orthopaedic training. It is cost effective, easily accessible and allows repeated practice which is key in simulation training.
Project description:Lumbar puncture is an essential tool for excluding subarachnoid haemorrhage. In August 2012, the laboratory at which cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is analysed for xanthochromia in Lanarkshire was centralised at Hairmyres (East Kilbride, UK). Prior to this, each of the three hospitals analysed their own specimens. We aim to assess whether or not the change in xanthochromia processing has resulted in diagnostic delay at Wishaw General Hospital in the assessment of CT negative possible subarachnoid haemorrhage. We subsequently assessed the impact of a strategy to minimise any delay, i.e. increasing laboratory processing hours. Patients undergoing CSF analysis for xanthochromia were identified directly from the laboratory database. Time of lumbar puncture, and time of xanthochromia results were obtained from the hospital's laboratory computer system. Data were analysed using a commercially available statistical software programme (Microsoft Excel). Audit was repeated after the change to a centralised laboratory, and again following the increased laboratory working hours. Mean time from lumbar puncture to availability of xanthochromia result was significantly longer following the laboratory change (20.8±3.5 hours post [n=35] vs. 12.5±3.0 pre, p=0.01 [n=17]). However, following a change in the laboratory's practice, there was no improvement (19.8±3.4 hours post practice change [n=35]), and this remained significantly longer when compared to the original laboratory set-up (p=0.025). The change in laboratory processing CSF samples for xanthochromia in Lanarkshire resulted in a significant delay in analysing the samples. Attempts by the laboratory to extend processing hours did not make any significant improvement, but having expanded our knowledge of the issues, further measures are now planned to minimise delays in the future. Centralisation of laboratory services for CSF analysis, whilst cheaper, may impact negatively on clinical care.
Project description:COVID-19, as a crucial public health crisis, has affected our lives in nearly every aspect. Besides its major health threats, COVID-19 brings severe secondary impacts, one of which is the rise of social stigma. Although numerous studies have examined the antecedents and outcomes of COVID-19-related stigma, we still lack a systematic understanding of who is being stigmatized during the COVID-19 pandemic, what exacerbates COVID-19-related stigma, and what impacts COVID-19-related stigma has on victims. Therefore, this review aims to provide a systematic overview of COVID-19-related stigma. With 93 papers conducted with 126,371 individuals in more than 150 countries and territories spanning five continents, we identify three targets that have received the most research: Chinese/Asian people, (suspected) patients and survivors, and healthcare workers. Furthermore, we find that for each stigma target, characteristics of the stigmatized, stigmatizer, and context contribute to COVID-19-related stigma and that this stigma negatively influences victims' health and non-health outcomes. We call for future research to provide a more integrative, balanced, and rigorous picture of COVID-19-related stigma via conducting research on neglected topics (e.g., contextual factors that contribute to stigma toward HCWs) and stigma interventions and using a longitudinal design. In practice, we urge governments and institutions (e.g., ministries of public health, hospitals) to pay close attention to stigma issues and to promote safe and inclusive societies.
Project description:Background:Many health sciences librarians are noticing an increase in demand for systematic review support. Developing a strategic approach to supporting systematic review activities can address commonly reported barriers and challenges including time factors, methodological issues, and supporting student-led projects. Case Presentation:This case report describes how a health sciences library at a mid-sized university developed and implemented a structured and defined systematic review service in order to build capacity for increased librarian support and to maximize librarians' time and expertise. The process also revealed underlying collaboration challenges related to student-led systematic reviews and research quality concerns that needed to be addressed. The steps for developing a formal service included defining the librarian's role and a library service model, building librarian expertise, developing documentation to guide librarians and patrons, piloting and revising the service model, marketing and promoting the service, and evaluating service usage. Conclusions:The two-tiered service model developed for advisory consultation and collaboration provides a framework for supporting systematic review activities that other libraries can adapt to meet their own needs. Librarian autonomy in deciding whether to collaborate on reviews based on defined and explicit considerations was crucial for maximizing librarians' time and expertise and for promoting higher quality research. Monitoring service usage will be imperative for managing existing and future librarian workload. These data and tracking of research outputs from librarian collaborations may also be used to advocate for new librarian positions.
Project description:BackgroundTremendous progress in acute stroke therapy has improved short-term outcome but part of this achievement may be lost in the long run. Concepts for a better long-term management of stroke survivors are needed to address their unmet needs and to reduce the burden of post-stroke complications, residual deficits, and recurrent vascular events.AimsThis review summarizes current knowledge on post-hospital care and the scientific evidence supporting individual programs.Summary of reviewA systematic search of electronic databases according to PRISMA guidelines identified 10,374 articles, 77 of which met the inclusion criteria. One large randomised controlled trial on a multifaceted care program delivered by the multidisciplinary stroke team reduced recurrent vascular events and improved quality of life and functional outcome one year after the event, while a number of studies offer solutions for individual components of post-hospital disease management like patient education, counselling, and self-management or the management of post-stroke complications and residual deficits. A majority of studies, however, was small in size and limited by a short follow-up. Most initiatives with a narrow focus on risk factor control failed to lower the risk of recurrent events. The caregivers' central role in post-stroke patient management is broadly neglected in research.ConclusionsOver the past years, first knowledge on how to best organize post-hospital care of stroke patients has emerged. Comprehensive and pragmatic programs operated by the multidisciplinary stroke team hold promise to reduce the long-term health burden of stroke. There is a clear need for further high-quality studies with both clinical endpoints and patient-reported outcomes to establish sustainable solutions in different settings and regions to improve life after stroke, a key priority of the Stroke Action Plan for Europe 2018-2030.
Project description:Task prioritization is one of the most researched areas in software development. Given the huge number of papers written on the topic, it might be challenging for IT practitioners-software developers, and IT project managers-to find the most appropriate tools or methods developed to date to deal with this important issue. The main goal of this work is therefore to review the current state of research and practice on task prioritization in the Software Engineering domain and to individuate the most effective ranking tools and techniques used in the industry. For this purpose, we conducted a systematic literature review guided and inspired by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, otherwise known as the PRISMA statement. Based on our analysis, we can make a number of important observations for the field. Firstly, we found that most of the task prioritization approaches developed to date involve a specific type of prioritization strategy-bug prioritization. Secondly, the most recent works we review investigate task prioritization in terms of "pull request prioritization" and "issue prioritization," (and we speculate that the number of such works will significantly increase due to the explosion of version control and issue management software systems). Thirdly, we remark that the most frequently used metrics for measuring the quality of a prioritization model are f-score, precision, recall, and accuracy.
