In‐house peer supported literature search training: a public health perspective

Tran, Anh

doi:10.1111/hir.12189

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• What other resources are necessary for program establishment and maintenance (e.g., technical equipment, facilities, literature resources, licenses)? [52,57,58,[60][61][62][63]75]…”

Section: Program Parameters Of Selected Training Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implementing evidence ecosystems in the public health service: Development of a framework for designing tailored training programs

Arnold,

Bimczok,

Clemens

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of local evidence ecosystems in which academia and practice in the Public Health Service (PHS) are interconnected. However, appropriate organizational structures and well-trained staff are lacking and evidence use in local public health decision-making has to be integrated into training programs in Germany. To address this issue, we developed a framework incorporating a toolbox to conceptualize training programs designed to qualify public health professionals for working at the interface between academia and practice. We conducted a scoping review of training programs, key-informant interviews with public health experts, and a multi-professional stakeholder workshop and triangulated their output. The resulting toolbox consists of four core elements, encompassing 15 parameters: (1) content-related aspects, (2) context-related aspects, (3) aspects relevant for determining the training format, and (4) aspects relevant for consolidation and further development. Guiding questions with examples supports the application of the toolbox. Additionally, we introduced a how-to-use guidance to streamline the creation of new training programs, fostering knowledge transfer at the academia-practice interface, equipping public health researchers and practitioners with relevant skills for needs-based PHS research. By promoting collaborative training development across institutions, our approach encourages cross-institutional cooperation, enhances evidence utilization, and enables efficient resource allocation. This collaborative effort in developing training programs within local evidence ecosystems not only strengthens the scientific and practical impact but also lays a foundation for implementing complex public health measures effectively at the local level.

show abstract

“…• What other resources are necessary for program establishment and maintenance (e.g., technical equipment, facilities, literature resources, licenses)? [52,57,58,[60][61][62][63]75]…”

Section: Program Parameters Of Selected Training Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…� Which theories and models should be integrated? [56,59,60,68,70,[74][75][76] (e.g., Evidence-based Public Health (EBPH) [6], Essential Public Health Operations (EPHOs) [77], Health in all Policies (HiAP) [78], Information Pyramid [79])…”

Section: (D) Program Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing evidence ecosystems in the public health service: Development of a framework for designing tailored training programs

Arnold,

Bimczok,

Clemens

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information specialists come from a variety of backgrounds with different types of training and levels of experience (11;13;14). Only a few countries, such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada, offer formal university degrees (e.g., Master of Library and Information Science (15)).…”

Section: Tasks and Qualificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Involvement of information specialists and statisticians in systematic reviews

Waffenschmidt

Bender

2023

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Systematic reviews (SRs) are usually conducted by a highly specialized group of researchers. The routine involvement of methodological experts is a core methodological recommendation. The present commentary describes the qualifications required for information specialists and statisticians involved in SRs, as well as their tasks, the methodological challenges they face, and potential future areas of involvement. Tasks and qualifications Information specialists select the information sources, develop search strategies, conduct the searches, and report the results. Statisticians select the methods for evidence synthesis, assess the risk of bias, and interpret the results. The minimum requirements for their involvement in SRs are a suitable university degree (e.g., in statistics or librarian/information science or an equivalent degree), methodological and content expertise, and several years of experience. Key arguments The complexity of conducting SRs has greatly increased due to a massive rise in the amount of available evidence and the number and complexity of SR methods, largely statistical and information retrieval methods. Additional challenges exist in the actual conduct of an SR, such as judging how complex the research question could become and what hurdles could arise during the course of the project. Conclusion SRs are becoming more and more complex to conduct and information specialists and statisticians should routinely be involved right from the start of the SR. This increases the trustworthiness of SRs as the basis for reliable, unbiased and reproducible health policy, and clinical decision making.

show abstract

“…Here each search is finalised by both librarians discussing the search and any modifications that have been made for mutual learning. In another mentor-mentee type set-up the Public Health England Knowledge and Library Service (KLS) created an in-house-supported literature searching training program to both upskill colleagues and to support those gaining experience of literature searching in a public health context (Tran, 2017).…”

Section: Background and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Search Club: Using peer support to develop search skills and share knowledge in a specialist NHS team

Nicholas

Hopkins

Jordan

et al. 2021

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The newly-formed Knowledge Management team at Health Education England (HEE) established an internal "Search Club" for their Knowledge Specialists to share good practice, exchange ideas, and discuss approaches to developing search strategies. The article describes how this was initiated and run online. The sessions improved the Knowledge Management team skills, and gave them an opportunity to share and learn from each other. A further benefit has been the creation of resources such as a "synonyms bank", search strategies, and a bank of grey literature sources. These reduce duplication of effort, save time, and improve consistency across the team's output. D.I.

show abstract

In‐house peer supported literature search training: a public health perspective

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Implementing evidence ecosystems in the public health service: Development of a framework for designing tailored training programs

Implementing evidence ecosystems in the public health service: Development of a framework for designing tailored training programs

Involvement of information specialists and statisticians in systematic reviews

Search Club: Using peer support to develop search skills and share knowledge in a specialist NHS team

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About