davidrothman.net

davidrothman.net

Health Information | Geekery

 
 
 
 

Archive for Medical Librarianship Blogs

MedLib Blog Badge at Info.RxCases

Info.RxCases is a “companion to a new health information service that is being offered to patients and their families at the Herzl Family Practise Centre in Montreal, Quebec.”

Blogger Francesca Frati (previously mentioned here) writes:

The Patient health Information Service at Herzl (H-PHIS) opened its doors in early July of this year (2007) and is in the early developmental stages. The challenges faced by myself (the service’s coordinator), the staff, and the health care team at the HFPC are many and varied, as is to be expected when implementing a new and innovative service.

Perhaps the most unique aspect of the InfoRx model is the presence and participation of the information professional/librarian at point of care. This new and multidisciplinary approach presents a distinctive challenge. Health and support staff are not always clear on what knowledge and skills a librarian brings to the team. Conversely, I must be able to recognize and adapt to the needs and character of the community and of the setting itself.

This blog was created in response to some very astute and constructive criticism. After presenting to the residents at their weekly rounds, I was approached by one of the partners at the clinic who suggested that rather than introducing myself and the service and then explaining how to use it, it would have been more effective to present some cases illustrating what the service has to offer to the residents and to their patients. I see this as a perfect example of the kind of disconnect that can happen when two very different professions come together. In essence I had presented the way I would have to my own professional colleagues, but this was not the most appropriate approach given my audience.

After giving it some thought it occurred to me that it could be useful, both for myself and the rest of the team, for me to present a weekly case here, and talk about some of the challenges we are faced with and how these might best be resolved. Hopefully this will introduce some transparency to the InfoRx process.

This is meant to serve as a record of, and forum for discussion about, our challenges and successes. It is hopefully also an opportunity for other information professionals to be inspired by one example of what can be accomplished outside of the library setting.

Such a great idea.

Why is David always on about this badgey stuff? Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

Previously, I’ve noted the following blogs that display the MedLib Blog badge in their sidebars:

These blogs are:

  1. about medical / health / health sciences / biomedical librarianship;
  2. written by (a) medical librarian(s) or medical library paraprofessional(s);
  3. maintained by a medical library; or
  4. maintained by professional association of medical librarians and/or medical library paraprofessionals.

Hey! My blog has the MedLib Blog badge and you haven’t featured it here!

Sorry! I do try for omniscience, but frequently fall short of this goal. If I’ve missed the badge on your blog or if you’ve just added it, please let me know so I can link to it from here.

Why would I want to add the badge to my blog?

The badge links back to the masterlist of MedLib blogs to indicate the blog’s membership in the growing community (and sense of community) of MedLib blogs(/bloggers). (This should serve also as a reminder to add your blog to this masterlist, if appropriate.)

To add this badge to your own blog, just copy and paste this code:


<a href="http://liswiki.org/wiki/Medlib_Blogs">
<img src="http://tinyurl.com/y32hh8/"></a>

Not sure how to do this with your particular blogging software? Email me at david[DOT]rothman[AT]gmail[DOT]com and we’ll figure it out together. :)

March 26th, 2008 | Category: Blogging, Consumer Health Info, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments Off

On Microblogging (with video)

Michelle already elaborated a bit on Microblogging in a follow-up from the MLA Webcast last week, but this great video from CommonCraft provides a good, short explanation of the most popular microblogging platform, Twitter:

I have a Twitter account, I sometimes update my Facebook status, and I have a Pownce account that I don’t use. I haven’t seen any applications of microblogging that struck me as particularly useful to libraries or medicine, but I’ve found they can be a good bit of fun.

Additional reading:

March 10th, 2008 | Category: "Social Software", For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology, Video | Comments (8)

JMLA Case Studies Blog: Search Challenge

(Just a quick note from a rehearsal break in Chicago)

I love this announcement from the JMLA Case Studies in Health Sciences Librarianship blog:

“…we’re going to start posting a “search challenge” question each Monday. We encourage you to post your ideas and questions in the comments or to us by email (using our profile links above). You can also feel free to “reference interview” us by posting questions for clarification or more detail as needed.

Then, each Friday we’ll post a search strategy and other thoughts on that question. We hope this will add to the usefulness of the cases by giving another outlet for developing searching skills and discussing strategies with colleagues.”

March 4th, 2008 | Category: Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments Off

Rachel Walden on Replacing LIS Journals with Blogs

In response to this post about Marcus Banks’ assertion that Professional Librarian Journals Should Evolve into Blogs, Rachel Walden (a medical librarian, a blogger and an editor at the JMLA) left the following comments:

…I tend to agree with T. Scott on these matters1, for several reasons. I don’t see any reason why librarianship journals as blogs should be singled out as a specialty (goose, gander, etc.) in this discussion, so I’ll talk about this more generally.

1) I believe there is value in having a final version of a manuscript on the record. Getting things out quickly isn’t the only goal in publishing a paper, or shouldn’t be. A larger goal is to contribute to the body of knowledge on a topic, in a way that can be cited and referred to and built upon in the future. If the idea is that authors would post their work to a blog and solicit comments, presumably that manuscript is in a constant revisional state, forever and ever, unless the authors finally shut down comments (at what point is the amount of critique enough?) and post a “final” version. This is perhaps more important when large flaws are detected, and it is nice to have a record of the final version of the manuscript. When citing it, are you citing the final version, or some version in which the author tweaked something in the post? If you cite it, will changes happen later that render your reference irrelevant? I think this process would make it harder to talk about what a given author said or did, and it also puts a tremendous amount of trust in the authors not to change things in a way that is dishonest or unethical. With an official “final” version, the author is officially on the record, and I think that’s an important concept.

2)”The argument for pre-publication peer review is that it filters out poor research.” Marcus seems to believe that this isn’t an issue for library research, or at least that the stakes aren’t high enough to matter. I would ask whether librarians seeking tenure and professional respect are really willing to hang themselves out there like this, simply assuming that what they’ve done is good enough for public consumption. Like Scott, I believe this simply isn’t true. Librarians are perfectly capable of producing research that, in its initial state, would be ripped to shreds by competent reviewers. I suspect that many would prefer that critique to happen more privately, to give them a chance to rethink their assumptions and presentation before opening themselves up to professional criticism and embarrassment.

3) Peer review takes work. When a committed board of peer reviewers exists with a demonstrated interest in the process and a deadline for providing feedback, and an editor does the work Scott mentions prior to publication, it is a certainty that an author will receive feedback. Blog comments are an unreliable thing. Commenters may never hit on the one true major flaw of a manuscript, may not have the expertise to critique to manuscript, or may simply not have time to digest a full manuscript in its raw form and suggest all of the appropriate revisions. The manuscript and the professional body of knowledge may suffer from this, as its not just the shiny, catchy papers that need feedback and critique.

4) Related to #3, it would be important to determine whether a manuscript was just open to whoever felt like commenting (or not), or if peer reviewers would be assigned drop by and comment. Would they be allowed to do so anonymously? Could an editor comment anonymously? If not, would the editor continue to make the needed comments Scott mentions about organization and content? I know some have advocated for peer review that is not anonymous, but I suspect that harsher, yet needed, criticisms might be held back if they had to be publicly written with a name and IP attached.

I’m not saying it couldn’t be done. These are just a handful of issues I see as barriers that would have to be considered. Ultimately, I think part of the question is whether we’re so determined as authors to put our unfiltered thoughts out there as fast as possible, or whether we’re really interested in being accountable and on the record and contributing to the professional knowledge base in a substantial way, even if it takes a little longer. I want to think about this a little longer.

The first of Rachel’s four points made me think about wikis. Since most articles on most wikis lack “final versions,” they might have the same problem that Rachel describes here. Imagine we have a wiki for an academic discipline where contributors are vetted professionals in their disciplines, where the administrators are transparently listed, where rigorous editorial policies are strictly enforced, and where there is an active community of revision that seeks to constantly improve entries. In this hypothetical, we’ll also imagine that the wiki is, for these reasons, considered an authoritative resource by most academics in the discipline it serves. In this hypothetical, how would such a resource be cited when, as Rachel points out, there may not be a “final” version? As it turns out, this isn’t really very hard because good wiki software includes a revision history for every page2. Wikipedia itself suggests how it can best be cited in a way that clearly indicates what revision the citing author is referring to by including in the citation the date on which the information was retrieved from the Web. Where blogging software would fail to solve this problem is in that most blogging platforms do not have a convenient way of tracking revision history. Developers: Could we please have a WordPress plugin for “versioning” posts?

Getting it out quickly

When it comes to technology topics, I think that getting the information out quickly is especially important because the technology changes so dang quickly.

For a while there, I thought about TechEssence as kind of informal, blog-based journal on technology topics of interest to LIS people. It went without being updated for long periods and in recent months Roy Tennant has been the only person posting to it, but it is a good concept, isn’t it?

I think that library technologists would probably be mostly comfortable throwing their work onto the Web for immediate criticism and would, in fact, rely on their peers to examine their work critically. I mean, have you ever seen technologists discuss technology books? Most geeks I know seem to have a compulsion to get out the red pen and start correcting what they see as flaws.

So…

So if Marcus moves forward with his goal of making a blog-based LIS journal (something I’m still not entirely convinced is a good idea), I’d suggest making technology its focus and developing a revision history plugin for WordPress.

February 25th, 2008 | Category: "Social Software", Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology, Wikis | Comments (2)

Calculating the Value of Your Library

I had planned just to blog about the calculator posted by the MidContinental Region of the National Network of Libraries of Medicine, but before I got to it, The Krafty Librarian did much more by pointing to a whole bunch of calculators. Go check out Michelle’s post and see if one (or more) of these tools will help you prove the value of your library.

February 23rd, 2008 | Category: For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Perception of Libraries/Librarians, Technology | Comments Off

Nitpicks: CNN’s “Tips for savvy medical Web surfing”

Blame Rachel. She started it by offering a critique of CNN’s Tips for savvy medical Web surfing:

In this section about searching for articles in the major medical literature database, PubMed, Guthrie advises reading just the beginning and end of the study, stating that “The conclusion will tell you whether the treatment they studied was effective, moderately effective, or not at all effective.”

This is simply not true as an absolute, and it is the exact opposite of how many expert medical librarians are trained to read papers. The abstract, introduction, conclusion and discussion sections of a paper most reflect the way the authors want to present their data, and may exaggerate findings or make statements that are not supported by the methodology and data. These are the very sections in which authors attempt to make their case for why their work matters – they tell you what the authors think their findings mean, but don’t actually prove it definitively.

Rachel is right. Her criticism moved me to re-read the article with a more critical eye. Here are some nitpicks:

The CNN article says:

To get rid of the junk, use a search engine that looks only at reputable sites that have been vetted by health professionals. Dirline, run by the National Library of Medicine, is one such engine, as are medlineplus.gov and Imedix.com. Healthfinder.gov searches for information on government health Web sites.

First, neither Dirline or MedlinePlus are search engines. Dirline is a searchable directory of organizations in healtthcare, MedlinePlus searches only its own content, including links to external reputable resources. (See? Nitpicking.)

Second and more importantly, it is ridiculous to compare iMedix to MedlinePlus and to describe iMedix as a resource that looks “only at reputable sites that have been vetted by health professionals.” iMedix’s own About page says:

Whether you’re looking for symptoms, diseases, treatments, or simply general health information, you will be searching together with many other people. Members of the iMedix community assist each other by sharing their experiences and ranking medical content in order to make health information personal, organized and accessible to any individual.

[My emphasis]

Translation: The information on iMedix isn’t vetted by health professionals- it is vetted by other laypeople.

It shows, too. I tried searching for Crohn’s. Here are the top results:

High-quality links vetted by health professionals? Comparable to MedlinePlus in any way? No.

February 21st, 2008 | Category: Consumer Health Info, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Search, Technology | Comments (4)

New JEAHIL: Semantic Web Applications in Biology and Medicine

The Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries has a new issue out.

On page 41 of the PDF, check out an article by Ioana Robu (”Semantic Web applications in biology and medicine”) that updates “An introduction to the Semantic Web for health sciences librarians” (J Med Libr Assoc. 2006;94(2):198-205.) with information about semantic Web applications.

While you’re in that PDF, also consider checking out:

  • Benoit Thirion recommends recent literature starting on page 45.
  • Starting on page 47, Oliver Obst’s “Web 2.0″ column makes notes on developments on the Web since the previous issue of the JEAHIL.

February 18th, 2008 | Category: "Social Software", Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology, Wikis | Comments Off

OvidSP RSS Tutorial

From the Yale University School of Medicine’s Cushing/Whitney Medical Library comes a nice screencast tutorial on generating search-based RSS feeds from OvidSP.

You can download the tutorial (mp4) or watch the streaming version.

Be sure to check out the rest of the tutorials from this blog of video tutorials and consider subscribing to its RSS feed.

February 18th, 2008 | Category: For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Search, Teaching/Training, Technology, Video | Comments (2)

Troubled Tuesday (Reactions to Marcus Monday)

Dean Giustini likes Marcus’ idea about replacing LIS journals with blogs (see yesterday’s post), but also has concerns:

…my only reservation is when research methods are used such as randomization and the articles would need to go through peer-review.

T. Scott (former editor of the JMLA and one of my favorite contrarians) explains some of his reservations about the idea:

I’m not one who is terribly impressed by the “wisdom of crowds” (a concept that seems to be especially dubious during the US election season). I’ve rarely seen anything approaching substantive discussion and analysis take place in a comment thread, and the longer the thread, the more worthless it typically is. Rather than providing vibrant post-publication review, I’m afraid that posting unedited articles for comment would result in much good work being buried and ignored.

[...snip...]

Marcus is pushing the right questions, and everyone involved in scholarly publishing, at whatever level, should be thinking creatively about how to make the communication and discussion of projects and ideas more effective.

I’ve noticed my neck often aches after reading T. Scott’s blog. After some investigation, I’ve finally figured out that this is because I can’t seem to stop nodding my head while I read him.

I especially like this last bit of his post:

But it isn’t a matter of journals vs blogs. The most effective modes of communication that we develop over the next decade will adopt features that we associate with each, but will be fundamentally different from either.

I couldn’t agree more. I don’t think that blogs or wikis are going to revolutionize medicine, education, or publishing- but some applications of their descendent technologies might.

Since LIS News and LibraryStuff both posted about it, I’m betting there’ll be more interesting opinions to enjoy soon.

February 12th, 2008 | Category: "Social Software", Blogging, E-Journals, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments (3)

NLM Browser Toolbar

http://nlm.ourtoolbar.com/

This appears to be a Conduit toolbar…but I see no proof that the NLM is actually behind it.

If you install it and use it, leave a comment to let me know what you think of it?

[Via Guus van den Brekel]

February 3rd, 2008 | Category: 3rd Party PubMed/MEDLINE Tools, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Search, Technology | Comments (5)

MedLib Blog Badge at Bobobiblioblog

Le beau (bo) blog d’un bobo bibliothécaire en médecine – là où l’on soigne les bobos, dans tous les sens du terme.

If I’m making proper use of translation tools and not being an idiot (bit dicey to make bets on that…), the title of this blog (Bobobiblioblog) appears to be a play on words, saying that the blogger is a “beautiful one” (bo) and, as a medical librarian, a librarian for what anglophonic children might call “boo-boos” (injuries).

Francophones should please correct me if I’m mistaken.

Why is David always on about this badgey stuff? Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

Previously, I’ve noted the following blogs that display the MedLib Blog badge in their sidebars:

These blogs are:

  1. about medical / health / health sciences / biomedical librarianship;
  2. written by (a) medical librarian(s) or medical library paraprofessional(s);
  3. maintained by a medical library; or
  4. maintained by professional association of medical librarians and/or medical library paraprofessionals.

Hey! My blog has the MedLib Blog badge and you haven’t featured it here!

Sorry! I do try for omniscience, but frequently fall short of this goal. If I’ve missed the badge on your blog or if you’ve just added it, please let me know so I can link to it from here.

Why would I want to add the badge to my blog?

The badge links back to the masterlist of MedLib blogs to indicate the blog’s membership in the growing community (and sense of community) of MedLib blogs(/bloggers). (This should serve also as a reminder to add your blog to this masterlist, if appropriate.)

To add this badge to your own blog, just copy and paste this code:


<a href="http://liswiki.org/wiki/Medlib_Blogs">
<img src="http://tinyurl.com/y32hh8/"></a>

Not sure how to do this with your particular blogging software? Email me at david[DOT]rothman[AT]gmail[DOT]com and we’ll figure it out together. :)

January 22nd, 2008 | Category: Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments Off

MedLib Blog Readers Survey: Preliminary Results

Marcus Banks has closed and posted the results of his survey (previously mentioned here) for “librarians who read blogs that are written by health sciences librarians and targeted to other professionals.”

Check out the results here.

I loved seeing the results of Question 5:

5. How do you follow blogs?: 256 responses (1o people skipped this question)

A. Bookmark/check periodically: 61/256 (23.8% of 256)
B. Subscribe via RSS: 188/256 (73.4% of 256)
C. Subscribe via email: 7/256 (2.7% of 256)

So glad to see that so many are sensibly using RSS. :)

Also interesting:

6. Of the choices below, what BEST describes the reason you read blogs?: 243 responses (23 people skipped this question)

A. Current awareness about new technologies and tools: 185/243 (76.1% of 243)
B. Source of discussion and debate: 39/243 (16% of 243)
C. Tips on what to read in the professional literature: 13/243 (5.3 % of 243)
D. To increase professional connections: 6/243 (2.5% of 243)
E. Other (please specify): 40 comments. As always, making comments depended upon selecting one of the options provided.

This is exciting:

7. How often do you attempt to incorporate what you read about in librarian blogs in your work?: 261 responses (5 people skipped this question)

A. Very infrequently: 23/261 (8.8% of 261)
B. Somewhat infrequently: 55/261 (21.1% of 261)
C. Somewhat frequently: 110/261 (42.1% of 261)
D. Frequently: 61/261 (23.4% of 261)
E. Very frequently: 12/261 (4.6% of 261)

So…this would seem to indicate that more than 70% of medical librarians who read medlib blogs “frequently” attempt to incorporate what they learn from blogs into their work! Wow!

Can’t wait to hear more about Marcus’ paper.

January 21st, 2008 | Category: "Social Software", Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, RSS/Feeds, Technology | Comments (2)

OvidSP Resources

The Krafty Librarian has assembled a number of useful resources on OvidSP that should be helpful to those still working on transition plans.

You can also check out what other medical libraries are doing by searching the Medical Library CSE for ovidsp.

You could even seek out specific instructional materials by searching for Ovidsp (handout OR instructions OR “how to” OR training)

For what the biblioblogosphere has had to say about OvidSP, see this LibWorm search.

January 19th, 2008 | Category: CSEs, For Medical Libraryfolk, LibWorm, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Search, Teaching/Training, Technology, Vendors | Comments Off

MedLib Blog Badge at Patient Education Matters!

“Patient Education Matters!” is a bi-weekly e-newsletter for the staff and volunteers of Inova Health System. The “Patient Education Matters!” blog is an abridged version of this publication available to the general public.


Why is David always on about this badgey stuff? Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

Previously, I’ve noted the following blogs that display the MedLib Blog badge in their sidebars:

These blogs are:

  1. about medical / health / health sciences / biomedical librarianship;
  2. written by (a) medical librarian(s) or medical library paraprofessional(s);
  3. maintained by a medical library; or
  4. maintained by professional association of medical librarians and/or medical library paraprofessionals.

Hey! My blog has the MedLib Blog badge and you haven’t featured it here!

Sorry! I do try for omniscience, but frequently fall short of this goal. If I’ve missed the badge on your blog or if you’ve just added it, please let me know so I can link to it from here.

Why would I want to add the badge to my blog?

The badge links back to the masterlist of MedLib blogs to indicate the blog’s membership in the growing community (and sense of community) of MedLib blogs(/bloggers). (This should serve also as a reminder to add your blog to this masterlist, if appropriate.)

To add this badge to your own blog, just copy and paste this code:


<a href="http://liswiki.org/wiki/Medlib_Blogs">
<img src="http://tinyurl.com/y32hh8/"></a>

Not sure how to do this with your particular blogging software? Email me at david[DOT]rothman[AT]gmail[DOT]com and we’ll figure it out together. :)

January 13th, 2008 | Category: Blogging, Consumer Health Info, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments (1)

The Beauty of the Dialectical Process

Well, I was pretty hard on Dean Giustini’s BMJ Editorial.

I have believed in the value of the dialectical process since long before I knew there was a term for it and have always believed that honest criticism serves the criticized, the critic, and those witnessing the process.

So I LOVE that Dean decided to specifically address one of my criticisms.

I questioned Dean’s assertion that “Google’s search results are emblematic of an approaching crisis with information overload”.

Dean writes:

Google most certainly is emblematic (a visible symbol) of information overload, and in fact is the information specialist’s laboratory for it.

I see honest disagreement here.

I think Google is emblematic of the way that the clever application of technology overcomes “information overload.” The Web is huge, filled with an insane amount of information that is varyingly good, bad, ugly or [fill in your favorite adjective here]. But if one uses Google to search for Google Scholar Dean, the first four results are about Dean Giustini, the author of the UBC Google Scholar Blog. It took typing three words and I found EXACTLY what I was looking for in about 0.51 seconds. To me, this doesn’t paint an image of Google as a symbol of information overload.

Dean continues:

“It’s well-documented throughout the blogosphere that web 2.0 has resulted in too many RSS feeds, too much data and information from disparate sources with little connection to each other.”

First, there are many popular positions (technical, political, philosophical…) expressed in the blogosphere (and elsewhere) that I believe to be wrong-headed, foolish, unwise or silly. I also believe that decisions based on evidence and direct experience tend to get better results than those built on blogosphere buzz and hearsay.

Second, I’m sincerely flabbergasted to hear a librarian (or any information professional) complain that there is “too much data” or “too many RSS feeds”.

“Web 2.0″ doesn’t cause an information glut. What causes an information glut is being an information glutton, taking on more than anyone can reasonably manage. There aren’t too many RSS feeds. Rather, there are users who subscribe to too many RSS feeds. The solution isn’t for less data to exist, the solution is smarter, more selective use of the data. The tools that help us filter and manage the information that we care most about are continuing to improve in power and sophistication.

The feeds I subscribe to are so carefully chosen and filtered that I started to worry about missing out on serendipitous discovery of information I didn’t know I needed. I remedied this by using feeds from the social bookmarking of medical librarians (and other beloved medical/technology information nerds) to keep an eye on what they find interesting. In this way, the tools that Dean sees as contributing to the “information glut” open me up to new ideas, thoughts, and resources that I would otherwise not have found. With the smart use of my aggregator, I can browse these quickly and easily, discarding what doesn’t suit my interests.

Dean also writes:

“99% of the information that we are finding in Google is irrelevant to medicine.”

Sure, but I’ve never heard a single physician claim Google is irrelevant to Medicine. On the contrary, many talk about how frequently they use it. Meanwhile, 99.99% of what’s findable via PubMed is irrelevant to a particular healthcare information need. So what?

Meanwhile, turnabout is absolutely fair play, and Dean reciprocates by sharing some criticism of my own writing. Because I’m really enjoying the direct discussion and believe in the dialectical process, I’m going to address each of his criticisms.

Dean writes:

“If you have some different ideas on where the web is, why don’t you write your own piece?”

I will absolutely be pleased to write an Op-Ed on the Web and health information at the invitation of the first prestigious medical journal which invites me to do so.

I’d might use the opportunity to demystify buzzwords, clear up popular misconceptions and/or call for a new sort of rigor in the way that writers in medicine and libraries use technology buzzwords in order to better empower each other and those whose needs they serve.

I could alternately suggest practical ways in which existing technologies could be leveraged to expand or improve information services for clinical patrons.

Dean writes:

“One thing about David’s blogging is that he doesn’t explore the social or cultural context for all the tools he introduces.”

That’s usually true. After all, I’m neither a sociologist nor a cultural anthropologist.

I usually talk about how Web tools might be applied in the setting of a medical library. That’s sort of what this blog is for- and I’ve said that from the very first post.

I run a hospital library and I solve problems that hospital-based users experience while using technology. I write about the things that interest me and that I think will interest others who do similar work and face similar problems. That’s what defines the general scope of this blog- and I’m happy with it.

Dean writes:

“It’s much harder to place information technologies in some context than it is to merely announce that you’ve found a new tool worth exploring.”

Although I really do think it is important and useful just to share the existence of tools that I think may be of interest or use to other medical libraryfolk, I often provide context. Some examples:

Both Dean and Dr. Ves Dimov (at Clinical Cases and Images) seem to think that I want to replace “Web 2.0″ with some other term.

Dr. Dimov writes:

David seems to suggest the alternative term “Web Geekery” which does not sound much better than “Web 2.0.”

I have at no time suggested that my complaints with the (mis)use of “Web 2.0″ would be solved by replacing it with ANY other term. “Web Geekery” is just the phrase I use to describe the stuff that interests me.2

I will point out, though, that not a single person has ever needed me to explain what I mean by “Web geekery.”

For the record, Ves- I don’t think there was anything wrong with your description of “Web 2.0 and Medicine” in 2005. You were talking about applying the trends O’Reilly described with “Web 2.0″ to the needs of medicine. Still, I dearly hope that many of the current uses of “2.0″, “3.0″ and (yes, really!) “Web 4.0″ will go away. The metaphor threatens to outgrow and eat what it was supposed to represent.

1 Is it perhaps a bit ironic that Dean is inspired to criticize what he sees as a lack of depth in my blogging by a long, detailed criticism of his article (which is something that he claims to want)?

2 I also refer to the words of smartasses as “smartassery” and refer to the deeds of dumb clucks as “dumbcluckery.” I don’t know why.

January 10th, 2008 | Category: "Library 2.0", "Social Software", Blogging, Information Literacy, Medical Librarianship Blogs, RSS/Feeds, Search, Technology | Comments (6)

Survey for Readers of MedLib Blogs

From Marcus Banks:

I’m working on a paper for a meeting in Las Vegas next month, called, “Delving into the Health Sciences Biblioblogosphere: How Has it Changed our Professional Practice?” The abstract is below.

For the paper I’ll include results of a survey of librarians who read blogs that are written by health sciences librarians and targeted to other professionals. These blogs should generally focus on library issues (which excludes my humble home here).

If you read blogs by and for health sciences librarians, please take 5-10 minutes to complete the survey. The survey is open until January 21, and I’m happy to answer any and all questions.

Thank you very much.

So if you’re reading this post, you’re probably the sort of person Marcus is looking to take the survey. Marcus says responding will take 5-10 minutes, but I found it took less than 2 minutes.

If you yourself write a MedLib blog that is read by medical libraryfolk, it’d be great if you’d also put up a post encouraging your readers to take the survey! Marcus has promised to share the results, so we’ll all benefit from the largest possible number of survey respondents.

January 6th, 2008 | Category: Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments (2)

I’ve been nominated

THIS is absolutely the last thing I’ll post in 2007. I’m not kidding around here.

I just now discovered that Rachel nominated this blog in the Best Medical Technologies/Informatics Weblog category of the 2007 Medical Weblog Awards.

I don’t stand a snowball’s chance, but that was awfully nice of her. :)

If you have a couple of minutes, please consider heading over to the Blogger’s Choice Awards to vote for Rachel’s excellent blog.

December 20th, 2007 | Category: Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments (4)

Health Libraries and Web 2.0 Survey: Aussie Edition

Last post of 2007. Really.

A survey was undertaken in 2007 in the US by the MLA Social Networking Software Task Force investigating use of collaborative/social networking tools and services. Results from the original survey of MLA members are reported at the Task Force on Social Networking Software blog.

Libraries Using Evidence – eblip.net.au and NSW Health, with the support of Health Libraries Australia, extended this survey to the Australian context. Staff in health libraries across Australia (hospital, academic, special etc) were invited to participate.

The Australian data will be used to generate a snapshot of the use of and attitudes towards collaborative/social networking tools and services. Results will provide librarians with evidence to assist in influencing policy and practice at their workplace. Results will be reported in the first instance on the Health LIS 2.0 and Libraries Using Evidence blogs.

Cool!

Preliminary results: [PDF]

[via]

December 17th, 2007 | Category: "Library 2.0", "Social Software", Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments (1)

MedLib Blog Badge at Staying Well. Connected.

The librarians at the UT Health Science Center San Antonio have recently rolled out a new blog called Staying Well. Connected.

This blog is a project of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Library. Its purpose is to foster the exchange of community health information in South Texas and US-Mexico border communities.

Why is David always on about this badgey stuff? Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!

Previously, I’ve noted the following blogs that display the MedLib Blog badge in their sidebars:

These blogs are:

  1. about medical / health / health sciences / biomedical librarianship;
  2. written by (a) medical librarian(s) or medical library paraprofessional(s);
  3. maintained by a medical library; or
  4. maintained by professional association of medical librarians and/or medical library paraprofessionals.

Hey! My blog has the MedLib Blog badge and you haven’t featured it here!

Sorry! I do try for omniscience, but frequently fall short of this goal. If I’ve missed the badge on your blog or if you’ve just added it, please let me know so I can link to it from here.

Why would I want to add the badge to my blog?

The badge links back to the masterlist of MedLib blogs to indicate the blog’s membership in the growing community (and sense of community) of MedLib blogs(/bloggers). (This should serve also as a reminder to add your blog to this masterlist, if appropriate.)

To add this badge to your own blog, just copy and paste this code:


<a href="http://liswiki.org/wiki/Medlib_Blogs">
<img src="http://tinyurl.com/y32hh8/"></a>

Not sure how to do this with your particular blogging software? Email me at david[DOT]rothman[AT]gmail[DOT]com and we’ll figure it out together. :)

December 13th, 2007 | Category: Blogging, For Medical Libraryfolk, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Technology | Comments Off

Pinky and The Brain on Neuroanatomy

Becky Jerome points to this fun video in which The Brain teaches us about the anatomy of the brain through song.

Confession: I own Animaniacs soundtracks and DVDs. I love the music and I thought the Wheel of Morality was a riot.

December 10th, 2007 | Category: For Medical Libraryfolk, Fun, Medical Librarianship Blogs, Video | Comments Off

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Pages

Recent Comments

Archives

RSS Incoming Links

  • Orthopedic Physical Examination � Atencion Primaria March 3, 2012
    Crece la venta de drogas ilegales por internet Immunogenicity of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in infants after two or three primaryvaccinations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. RSS feed · Google · Youdao · Xian Guo · Zhua Xia ... […]
  • CBS Bibliotek Blog � Innovation & Ny Viden � Blog Archive � Fra ... May 13, 2011
    I sidste uge udsendte jeg et sp�rgeskema om videndeling p� de danske biblioteker. Tak til alle 144 der svarede :-) Det var rigtig mange flere end jeg havde dr�mt om. Resultaterne herfra vil komme her p� bloggen over de n�ste par uger. […]
  • Summary of suggestions on expert speakers on mobile technologies ... April 29, 2011
    Hi, all. Please excuse the cross posting. I just want to thank everyone who took the time and went to the trouble of responding to my request for suggestions on expert speakers on mobile technologies--preferably in medical settings. I am very ... […]
  • Patient Handouts � MHSLA Blog April 1, 2011
    David Rothman is developing a Patient Handout Search utilizing Google Custom Search Engine. The simple design should be easy to use on mobile devices such as tablet PCs. Printable handouts are culled from free authoritative sources ... […]
  • I blame the e-book � The (Ultimate) Librarian March 28, 2011
    The ebook debate rages on (a story on NPR this morning pitted a librarian against a professor on whether interactive book apps were actually books�the example was Dr. Seuss). But they're pretty standard in various forms in libraries and ... […]
  • PI (weekly) � PI en Second Life March 12, 2011
    Renderosity Digital Art Community. tags: renderosity · Install Layer Styles in Photoshop Elements 7�9�Windows � Scrapper's Guide Forums. tags: photoshopelements · Learning with 'e's. tags: e-learning · Secure Online Backup and Archiving ... […]
  • Common Sense (Librarianship) Is Always In Fashion | (almost) Bald ... March 2, 2011
    Common Sense these days in library land and the More Perfect Union is not too common. Institutions that rise the intellectual tide for all (Libraries, Unions, Arts) are under assault from without and within. A certain book publisher (rhymes with ... […]
  • complex, but with multiple access points – Liquor for Librarians January 1, 2011
    Apropos. Pedantic: Liquor for Librarians . Happy New Year everyone. Year-end reading and library lists start tomorrow....... […]
  • L'observatoire du neuromancien 12/22/2010 | Cactus Acide December 22, 2010
    Ecrit par Olivier Le Deuff on d�cembre 22nd, 2010 Aucun commentaire Pour imprimer. Archival science / علم الأرشيف: 2010-02. tags: archivistique · Transliteracy from the perspective of an information literacy advocate | Information Wants To ... […]
  • Kritik am Konzept der �Transliteracy� � FobiKom-Weblog December 21, 2010
    Ilona ist zwar schon weg, ich mache aber einmal bis morgen noch weiter, f�r die Zur�ckgebliebenen � :). Ende Oktober hatte ich auf das neue Konzept einer �Transliteralit�t� aufmerksam gemacht, welches insbesondere von Bobby L. […]

Subscribe

Posts (RSS)
Comments (RSS)

Enter your email address to receive email updates of new posts:



Search

 


Contact



card.ly

Elsewhere Online

Reciprocal Blogroll