Brief communications 4. LEGGoTT M. LANs and CD-ROMs. OCLC Micro 1989 Aug; 5(4):18-19, 22. 5. PEMBERTON AC. LP interviews Chris Pooley of SilverPlatter new products, new software, and a network.... Laserdisk Prof 1989 Mar;2(2):17-22. 6. TENOPIR C. What's happening with CD-ROM, part 2: networks and more. Libr J 1989 Nov 1;114(18):68-70. 7. CAREY J. Installing a local area compact disk network. Coll Res Libr News 1989 Dec;50(11):988-91. 8. GRANr MA, STALKE JC. The multiplatter CD-ROM network at Boston College. Laserdisk Prof 1989 Sep;2(5):12-8. 9. HARNEY JM. A comparison of different CD-ROM local area networks in universities. CD-ROM EndUser 1989 Jun; 1(2):17-22. 10. REESE J. CD-ROM at Vanderbilt University: continuing costs and issues. Laserdisk Prof 1989 Mar;2(2):30-7. 11. SiLvER H. Managing a CD-ROM installation ... a case study at Hahnemann University. Online 1988 Mar;12(2): 61-6.
Medical students as CD-ROM end-user trainers* By Martha F. Earl, M.S.L.S. Reference Librarian
Medical Library James H. Quillen College of Medicine East Tennessee State University Johnson City, Tennessee 37614
Cheryl J. Hamberg, M.S.L.S. Library Director
Meharry Medical College Library 1005 D. B. Todd Boulevard Nashville, Tennessee 37208
Received February 1990; accepted March 1990
INTRODUCTION
APPENDIX System specifications
The potential for CD-ROM use in libraries remains remarkable. Yet, the introduction of any new technology possesses both advantages and drawbacks [1]. This communication addresses the problem of extra staff time needed to train end users. Copadagli and associates found that instruction in use of CD-ROM was necessary [2]. At Meharry, instruction in the use of Cambridge and SilverPlattert CD-ROM systems is provided in small groups, as well as one-on-one. As Crane and Durfee stated, few librarians have found they can rely on vendor-supplied user aids or the user-friendliness of search software [3]. Pearce calculated that users typically require fifteen to twenty minutes of explanation before entering the system and almost invariably return for help two or three times during their initial search [4]. Meharry end users have remarked that unless they use the system once or twice per week, they forget details of using the system. At the National Library of Medicine CD-ROM forum in Bethesda, Maryland, librarians agreed that staffing is a problem [5]. As a possible solution, Deeney suggested using library school students to staff the reference desk in health sciences libraries [6]. Meharry librarians devised a similar approach with a unique component; they trained a medical school student to teach online searching to medical end users.
Hardware File server = MICRONICS 386 PC 20MHZ Version 4.0 CD-ROM drives = 5 Hitachi CDR-1503S 1 AMDEC Laserdrive Interface cards Token rings: Racore 802.5 (V2.10) IBM V2.40 (for IBM PS/2 Model 80) Cabling Any 10 IBM or IBM-compatible PCs with fixed disks and 640K Software Novell NetWare 286 V2.15
SilverPlatter software OPTI-NET software V1.10 Microsoft MS-DOS CD-ROM Extensions (MSCDEX)
* Presented October 17-21, 1989, at the Southern Chapter of the Medical Library Association meeting, Johnson City, Tennessee. t SilverPlatter is a registered trademark of SilverPlatter Information, Inc.
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
65
Brief communications
COLLEAGUE-TO-COLLEAGUE INTERACTION
demonstrated understanding of search basics when questioned by librarians.
Tenopir observed that students who had learned to use InfoTrac would often bring their friends and teach them [7]. Likewise, Meharry students instructed their classmates on using MEDLINE on CD-ROM. This student-to-student interaction had certain advantages and disadvantages. The obvious disadvantage was the teaching of inaccurate or incomplete information. Students often neglected to use MeSH terms, entered phrases rather than using logical operators, and forgot how to limit or expand their searches. To complicate matters, student "teachers" seldom checked any documentation for help. Many assumed an air of "showing off" to their friends that made correction of their instruction a diplomatic affair and admission of ignorance on their part a rare occurrence. On the other hand, the advantages of student-tostudent instruction were numerous. Studies have shown that physicians often seek information by consulting other physicians, as well as by consulting printed sources [8-9]; also, physicians form information habits in medical school [10]. It follows logically that medical students would ask one another how to use a CD-ROM system before consulting the manual or help screens. Students were more comfortable directing questions to each other than to librarians who, despite their helpfulness, are still teacher authority figures. The authors are not suggesting that students replace librarians as primary library instructors. However, when the authors observed a student who showed interest in searching accurately and success in teaching others, the use of medical students as auxiliary CD-ROM instructors seemed an idea worth investigating. Meharry librarians hired such a student and provided training on the Cambridge and SilverPlatter CD-ROM systems. They also taught Boolean search techniques and reviewed the use of MeSH. Librarians had encountered student difficulty in learning to use tree structures and other search methods. When the student assistant taught these concepts, other students listened, asked questions, and learned more easily. The student assistant quickly consulted the librarians with difficult questions. Students trained by the student showed less reluctance to ask librarians questions about the CD-ROM and less stress when librarians asked them about their searches. The student assistant was available in the evenings or during the day when the need for end-user training was especially acute. The assistant even trained faculty and residents. Periodically, librarians observed the teaching and noted that efforts were made to learn more efficient search techniques that were then taught to end users. The student-trained end users clearly
THE STUDENT ASSISTANT'S PERSPECTIVE
66
The student assistant commented on teaching end users to search. First of all, the student said that understanding the needs of the medical students came from taking the same classes and experiencing the same aspects of student living, such as limited time and financial resources. Faculty and residents also responded well to the instruction, once they understood that the student could help them. Users were told how an article is indexed, rather than what an index is. Once they understood that one could retrieve a record using any of fifteen or more different MeSH terms, users could interpret the record better and search more effectively. It was also demonstrated how using tree structures could improve search results. The student noted that medical end users perceived that they had no time to read a manual but preferred "trying something to see if it worked." However, requests for simple instructions near the terminal were made; these have since been provided. End users preferred one-on-one instruction. THE LIBRARIANS' PERSPECTIVE
Though Meharry librarians have had success in employing a medical student as a teaching assistant, no system is perfect. Since medical students work irregular hours, librarians could hire more than one. As with any other position, student employees must be carefully chosen. Good candidates are those who are enthusiastic about teaching and computers. Librarians must supervise any teaching assistant during the first few weeks and periodically evaluate performance thereafter. Initial training is intensive and ongoing training necessary to provide the student assistant with new skills as CD-ROM products are enhanced. Such education and supervision require time. But compared with the time involved in frequent one-on-one end-user training, librarians will find that training time is a good investment. Tests or interviews measuring end-user reaction to training by students versus training by librarians are needed to further evaluate the use of students as CD-ROM end-user trainers.
REFERENCES 1. PEARCE KJ. CD-ROM: caveat emptor. Libr J 1988 Feb 1; 1 13(2):37-8. 2. CAPODAGLI JA, MARDIKIAN J, UVA PA. MEDLINE on com-
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
Brief communications pact disc: end-user searching on Compact Cambridge. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1988 Apr;76(2):181-3. 3. CRANE N, DuRFEE T. Entering unchartered territory: putting CD-ROM in place. Wilson Libr Bull 1987 Dec;62(4):2830. 4. PEARCE, Op. cit. 5. Evaluating MEDLINE on CD-ROM. NLM News 1988 Oct; 43(10):1,3. 6. DEENEY K. The role of paraprofessionals at the reference desk. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1990 Apr;78(2):191-3. 7. TENopiR C. Infotrac: a laser disc system. Libr J 1986 Sep 1;111(14):168-9. 8. WEINBERG AD, ULLLAN L, RICHARDS WD, COOPER P. Informal advice- and information-seeking between physicians. J Med Educ 1981 Mar;56(3):174-80. 9. OSIOBE SA. Use of information resources by health professionals: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1985;21(9): 965-73. 10. DAROSA DA, MAST TA, DAWSON-SAUNDERS B, MAZUR J ET AL. A study of the information-seeking skills of medical students and physician faculty. J Med Educ 1983 Jan;58(1): 45-50.
Received September 1989; accepted April 1990
Problems encountered by clinical end users of MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED*t By Cynthia J. Walker, M.L.S. Research Librarian, Health Information Research Unit Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics K. Ann McKibbon, M.L.S. Research Librarian, Health Information Research Unit Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics R. Brian Haynes, Ph.D. Chief, Health Information Research Unit Professor, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Department of Medicine
Michael F. Ramsden, M.D. Clinical Computer Scientist, Health Information Research Unit Assistant Professor, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Department of Medicine
Faculty of Health Sciences McMaster University 1200 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario Canada L8N 3Z5 INTRODUCTION End-user searching of MEDLINE has become increasingly popular with the growing prevalence of personal computers and user-friendly search programs. However, novice end users frequently encounter frustrations that may deter them from further searching. A study was undertaken at McMaster University Medical Center to observe medical personnel search MEDLINE in the clinical setting. Through direct observation, search capture, interviews, and questionnaires, reasons for successful and unsuccessful searches were determined. These suggest solutions for dealing with end users' search problems. The design [1] and other results [2] of this study have been reported previously. This paper reports new data analyzing the reasons why end-user searches were unproductive.
MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED are registered trademarks of the National Library of Medicine. t This research was supported by the National Library of Medicine Grant No. 1 401 LM 04696-01, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the National Health Research and Development Program of Canada. *
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
67
Medical students as CD-ROM end-user trainers* By Martha F. Earl, M.S.L.S. Reference Librarian
Medical Library James H. Quillen College of Medicine East Tennessee State University Johnson City, Tennessee 37614
Cheryl J. Hamberg, M.S.L.S. Library Director
Meharry Medical College Library 1005 D. B. Todd Boulevard Nashville, Tennessee 37208
Received February 1990; accepted March 1990
INTRODUCTION
APPENDIX System specifications
The potential for CD-ROM use in libraries remains remarkable. Yet, the introduction of any new technology possesses both advantages and drawbacks [1]. This communication addresses the problem of extra staff time needed to train end users. Copadagli and associates found that instruction in use of CD-ROM was necessary [2]. At Meharry, instruction in the use of Cambridge and SilverPlattert CD-ROM systems is provided in small groups, as well as one-on-one. As Crane and Durfee stated, few librarians have found they can rely on vendor-supplied user aids or the user-friendliness of search software [3]. Pearce calculated that users typically require fifteen to twenty minutes of explanation before entering the system and almost invariably return for help two or three times during their initial search [4]. Meharry end users have remarked that unless they use the system once or twice per week, they forget details of using the system. At the National Library of Medicine CD-ROM forum in Bethesda, Maryland, librarians agreed that staffing is a problem [5]. As a possible solution, Deeney suggested using library school students to staff the reference desk in health sciences libraries [6]. Meharry librarians devised a similar approach with a unique component; they trained a medical school student to teach online searching to medical end users.
Hardware File server = MICRONICS 386 PC 20MHZ Version 4.0 CD-ROM drives = 5 Hitachi CDR-1503S 1 AMDEC Laserdrive Interface cards Token rings: Racore 802.5 (V2.10) IBM V2.40 (for IBM PS/2 Model 80) Cabling Any 10 IBM or IBM-compatible PCs with fixed disks and 640K Software Novell NetWare 286 V2.15
SilverPlatter software OPTI-NET software V1.10 Microsoft MS-DOS CD-ROM Extensions (MSCDEX)
* Presented October 17-21, 1989, at the Southern Chapter of the Medical Library Association meeting, Johnson City, Tennessee. t SilverPlatter is a registered trademark of SilverPlatter Information, Inc.
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
65
Brief communications
COLLEAGUE-TO-COLLEAGUE INTERACTION
demonstrated understanding of search basics when questioned by librarians.
Tenopir observed that students who had learned to use InfoTrac would often bring their friends and teach them [7]. Likewise, Meharry students instructed their classmates on using MEDLINE on CD-ROM. This student-to-student interaction had certain advantages and disadvantages. The obvious disadvantage was the teaching of inaccurate or incomplete information. Students often neglected to use MeSH terms, entered phrases rather than using logical operators, and forgot how to limit or expand their searches. To complicate matters, student "teachers" seldom checked any documentation for help. Many assumed an air of "showing off" to their friends that made correction of their instruction a diplomatic affair and admission of ignorance on their part a rare occurrence. On the other hand, the advantages of student-tostudent instruction were numerous. Studies have shown that physicians often seek information by consulting other physicians, as well as by consulting printed sources [8-9]; also, physicians form information habits in medical school [10]. It follows logically that medical students would ask one another how to use a CD-ROM system before consulting the manual or help screens. Students were more comfortable directing questions to each other than to librarians who, despite their helpfulness, are still teacher authority figures. The authors are not suggesting that students replace librarians as primary library instructors. However, when the authors observed a student who showed interest in searching accurately and success in teaching others, the use of medical students as auxiliary CD-ROM instructors seemed an idea worth investigating. Meharry librarians hired such a student and provided training on the Cambridge and SilverPlatter CD-ROM systems. They also taught Boolean search techniques and reviewed the use of MeSH. Librarians had encountered student difficulty in learning to use tree structures and other search methods. When the student assistant taught these concepts, other students listened, asked questions, and learned more easily. The student assistant quickly consulted the librarians with difficult questions. Students trained by the student showed less reluctance to ask librarians questions about the CD-ROM and less stress when librarians asked them about their searches. The student assistant was available in the evenings or during the day when the need for end-user training was especially acute. The assistant even trained faculty and residents. Periodically, librarians observed the teaching and noted that efforts were made to learn more efficient search techniques that were then taught to end users. The student-trained end users clearly
THE STUDENT ASSISTANT'S PERSPECTIVE
66
The student assistant commented on teaching end users to search. First of all, the student said that understanding the needs of the medical students came from taking the same classes and experiencing the same aspects of student living, such as limited time and financial resources. Faculty and residents also responded well to the instruction, once they understood that the student could help them. Users were told how an article is indexed, rather than what an index is. Once they understood that one could retrieve a record using any of fifteen or more different MeSH terms, users could interpret the record better and search more effectively. It was also demonstrated how using tree structures could improve search results. The student noted that medical end users perceived that they had no time to read a manual but preferred "trying something to see if it worked." However, requests for simple instructions near the terminal were made; these have since been provided. End users preferred one-on-one instruction. THE LIBRARIANS' PERSPECTIVE
Though Meharry librarians have had success in employing a medical student as a teaching assistant, no system is perfect. Since medical students work irregular hours, librarians could hire more than one. As with any other position, student employees must be carefully chosen. Good candidates are those who are enthusiastic about teaching and computers. Librarians must supervise any teaching assistant during the first few weeks and periodically evaluate performance thereafter. Initial training is intensive and ongoing training necessary to provide the student assistant with new skills as CD-ROM products are enhanced. Such education and supervision require time. But compared with the time involved in frequent one-on-one end-user training, librarians will find that training time is a good investment. Tests or interviews measuring end-user reaction to training by students versus training by librarians are needed to further evaluate the use of students as CD-ROM end-user trainers.
REFERENCES 1. PEARCE KJ. CD-ROM: caveat emptor. Libr J 1988 Feb 1; 1 13(2):37-8. 2. CAPODAGLI JA, MARDIKIAN J, UVA PA. MEDLINE on com-
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
Brief communications pact disc: end-user searching on Compact Cambridge. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1988 Apr;76(2):181-3. 3. CRANE N, DuRFEE T. Entering unchartered territory: putting CD-ROM in place. Wilson Libr Bull 1987 Dec;62(4):2830. 4. PEARCE, Op. cit. 5. Evaluating MEDLINE on CD-ROM. NLM News 1988 Oct; 43(10):1,3. 6. DEENEY K. The role of paraprofessionals at the reference desk. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1990 Apr;78(2):191-3. 7. TENopiR C. Infotrac: a laser disc system. Libr J 1986 Sep 1;111(14):168-9. 8. WEINBERG AD, ULLLAN L, RICHARDS WD, COOPER P. Informal advice- and information-seeking between physicians. J Med Educ 1981 Mar;56(3):174-80. 9. OSIOBE SA. Use of information resources by health professionals: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1985;21(9): 965-73. 10. DAROSA DA, MAST TA, DAWSON-SAUNDERS B, MAZUR J ET AL. A study of the information-seeking skills of medical students and physician faculty. J Med Educ 1983 Jan;58(1): 45-50.
Received September 1989; accepted April 1990
Problems encountered by clinical end users of MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED*t By Cynthia J. Walker, M.L.S. Research Librarian, Health Information Research Unit Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics K. Ann McKibbon, M.L.S. Research Librarian, Health Information Research Unit Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics R. Brian Haynes, Ph.D. Chief, Health Information Research Unit Professor, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Department of Medicine
Michael F. Ramsden, M.D. Clinical Computer Scientist, Health Information Research Unit Assistant Professor, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, and Department of Medicine
Faculty of Health Sciences McMaster University 1200 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario Canada L8N 3Z5 INTRODUCTION End-user searching of MEDLINE has become increasingly popular with the growing prevalence of personal computers and user-friendly search programs. However, novice end users frequently encounter frustrations that may deter them from further searching. A study was undertaken at McMaster University Medical Center to observe medical personnel search MEDLINE in the clinical setting. Through direct observation, search capture, interviews, and questionnaires, reasons for successful and unsuccessful searches were determined. These suggest solutions for dealing with end users' search problems. The design [1] and other results [2] of this study have been reported previously. This paper reports new data analyzing the reasons why end-user searches were unproductive.
MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED are registered trademarks of the National Library of Medicine. t This research was supported by the National Library of Medicine Grant No. 1 401 LM 04696-01, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the National Health Research and Development Program of Canada. *
Bull Med Libr Assoc 79(1) January 1991
67
