This study investigates two questions key to academic library resources and services: Which sources are students most likely to use to begin their academic work? Whom do students tend to consult for research assistance? Indepth interviews conducted with 15 undergraduate and graduate students were thematically analyzed through a three-step process. The findings indicate that students are most likely to consult faculty and peers for assistance and are largely unaware of librarians' roles, while they tend to begin research using library databases and do not necessarily start with Google. In addition, student use of small study groups as learning networks and reliance upon alternate sites to conduct research emerged as unanticipated themes.

Background – A promising new approach, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has recently been used as a therapeutic modality for cerebellar ataxia. However, the strength of the conclusions drawn from individual studies in the current literature may be constrained by the small sample size of each trial. Methods – Following a systematic literature retrieval of studies, meta-analyses were conducted by pooling the standardized mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models to assess the efficacy of tDCS on cerebellar ataxia, measured by standard clinical rating scales. Domain-specific effects of tDCS on gait and hand function were further evaluated based on 8-meter walk and 9-hole peg test performance times, respectively. To determine the safety of tDCS, the incidences of adverse effects were analyzed using risk differences. Results – Out of 293 citations, 5 randomized controlled trials involving a total of 72 participants with cerebellar ataxia were included. Meta-analysis indicated a 26.1% ( p = 0.003) improvement in ataxia immediately after tDCS with sustained efficacy over months (28.2% improvement after 3 months, p = 0.04) when compared to sham stimulation. tDCS seems to be domain-specific as the current analysis suggested a positive effect on gait (16.3% improvement, p = 0.04), however failed to reveal differences for hand function ( p = 0.10) with respect to sham. The incidence of adverse events in tDCS and sham groups was similar. Conclusion – tDCS is an effective intervention for mitigating ataxia symptoms with lasting results that can be sustained for months. This treatment shows preferential effects on gait ataxia and is relatively safe.

ObjectiveThe authors developed a rubric for assessing undergraduate nursing research papers for information literacy skills critical to their development as researchers and health professionals.MethodsWe developed a rubric mapping six American Nurses Association professional standards onto six related concepts of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. We used this rubric to evaluate fifty student research papers and assess inter-rater reliability.ResultsStudents tended to score highest on the “Information Has Value” dimension and lowest on the “Scholarship as Conversation” dimension. However, we found a discrepancy between the grading patterns of the two investigators, with inter-rater reliability being “fair” or “poor” for all six rubric dimensions.ConclusionsThe development of a rubric that dually assesses information literacy skills and maps relevant disciplinary competencies holds potential. This study offers a template for a rubric inspired by the ACRL Framework and outside professional standards. However, the overall low inter-rater reliability demands further calibration of the rubric. Following additional norming, this rubric can be used to help students identify the key information literacy competencies that they need in order to succeed as college students and future nurses. These skills include developing an authoritative voice, determining the scope of their information needs, and understanding the ramifications of their information choices.

BACKGROUND: Despite routine evaluation of cytogenetics in myeloma, little is known regarding the impact of high-dose therapy (HDT) consolidation on overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in patients who have high-risk cytogenetics. The authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the heterogeneity of HDT efficacy according to cytogenetic risk. METHODS: All RCTs in patients who had newly diagnosed myeloma from 2000 to 2021 that compared upfront HDT versus standarddose therapy (SDT) consolidation were included. The primary objective was to assess the difference in HDT efficacy between standardrisk and high-risk cytogenetics in terms of the OS or PFS log(hazard ratio) (HR). The pooled OS and PFS HR was calculated according to cytogenetic-risk subgroup using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity (I 2 ) (the percentage of total observed variability explained by between-study differences) was assessed using an interaction test. RESULTS: After screening 3307 citations, 6 RCTs were included for PFS analysis, and 4 were included for OS analysis. The median follow-up ranged from 3.1 to 7.8 years. The pooled OS HR for HDT versus SDT consolidation in patients with standard-risk and high-risk cytogenetics was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.17; I 2 = 0%) and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.45-0.97; I 2 = 0%), respectively. The difference in HDT efficacy in terms of OS between standard-risk and high-risk patients was statistically significant in favor of the high-risk group (P for interaction = .03). The pooled PFS HR for HDT versus SDT was 0.65 (95% CI 0.56-0.76; I 2 = 0%) versus 0.52 (95% CI, 0.33-0.83; I 2 = 55%), respectively. The difference in HDT efficacy in terms of PFS between standard-risk and high-risk patients was not significant (P for interaction = .25). CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of OS benefit with upfront HDT is cytogenetics-dependent. Patients with high-risk cytogenetics should preferably receive upfront rather than delayed HDT consolidation.

Health science librarians, whether in academic or medical libraries, are increasingly becoming aware of mobile applications (apps) that offer the medical practitioner point-of-care access to current medical information. One can find hundreds of free apps or apps for purchase in the subjects of nursing, pharmacy, and medicine, as well as general consumer health and Wellness apps for the iOS (Apple Mobile Device Operating System) and Android platforms. Yet, apps that provide information for public health practice have been to slow to come. This column will explore the barriers to public health information access for the public health workforce, the need for public health apps, and current initiatives for open government data and web app development.