DOI: 10.1111/hir.12063
The academic librarian as co-investigator on an interprofessional primary research team: a case study Robert Janke* & Kathy L Rush† *Library, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC, Canada, and †School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC, Canada
Abstract Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the role librarians play on research teams. The experiences of a librarian and a faculty member are situated within the wider literature addressing collaborations between health science librarians and research faculty. Methods: A case study approach is used to outline the involvement of a librarian on a team created to investigate the best practices for integrating nurses into the workplace during their first year of practice. Results: Librarians contribute to research teams including expertise in the entire process of knowledge development and dissemination including the ability to navigate issues related to copyright and open access policies of funding agencies. Discussion: The librarian reviews the various tasks performed as part of the research team ranging from the grant application, to working on the initial literature review as well as the subsequent manuscripts that emerged from the primary research. The motivations for joining the research team, including authorship and relationship building, are also discussed. Recommendations are also made in terms of how librarians could increase their participation on research teams. Conclusion: The study shows that librarians can play a key role on interprofessional primary research teams. Keywords: case studies; inter-professional working; librarians, library services; research skills.
Key Messages
• • • •
Librarians can play a valuable role on research teams that can span the entire research process from question identification to dissemination. A willingness to work outside of the traditional roles of librarians may be a prerequisite for involvement and successful research team participation. Librarians on research teams may be one way to boost their visibility and profile on campus. Future research should attempt to establish how widespread this activity is and should include the perspective of faculty members and library administrators.
Introduction In these transformative times, one strategy for libraries to adopt to remain vibrant and relevant is to reposition and embed their expertise into the
Correspondence: Robert Janke, Library, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna BC Canada, VIV1V7, E-mail: [email protected]
116
teaching, learning and research enterprises of the academy.1 A scan of the literature, which focused on librarians and nursing faculty, revealed a robust body of literature detailing collaboration in the university classroom to develop information literacy and evidence based practice skills.2–4 These collaborations have emphasised researching a topic of joint interest, such as information literacy, as an interdisciplinary venture. Literature concerning
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
collaboration with faculty outside of the classroom, specifically in terms of librarians working on interprofessional primary research teams, is far more underdeveloped. Specifically, the contribution that librarians make to these teams through the application of their professional expertise has received little attention. The role of librarians on teams working on systematic reviews has been well studied5–7, but the librarian contribution as an interprofessional member of a ‘primary research team’, conducting original research, has yet to be elaborated. Aside from small scale qualitative studies8,9, very little research has been performed regarding librarians working on research teams. Therefore, the purpose of this case study was to document collaboration between a librarian and a nursing faculty member. The specific objectives included the following: (i) to describe librarian and faculty members experience of working together on an interprofessional primary research team; (ii) to evaluate the value of the librarian role on the team from librarian and faculty member perspectives; and (iii) to consider findings in the light of the existing literature in this area. Academic librarians may or may not hold faculty appointments, a factor that may influence the nature and types of contributions they make. For the purposes of this paper, the term ‘faculty’ will not include librarians. Methods Case study: the new graduate integration team The New Graduate Integration Team (NewGIT) was formed to investigate the best practices for integrating post registration nurses in their first year of practice into the acute care workplace. The co-principal investigators brought together experience from both academic and practice settings. The research was ultimately funded by an 18 month $150 000 grant from a provincial funding agency. The grant application included a budget for a research coordinator, who was hired shortly after the grant was awarded. The budget also included 80 hours of funding to pay the library for the librarian’s time. The NewGIT research was designed to be multi-phasic. The first phase involved an integrative literature review to determine best practices
for integrating new graduate nurses in the workplace, the results of which have already been published.10 The second phase involved a mixed methods study designed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the application of new nurse graduate transition best practices in selected British Columbia hospitals from the perspective of multiple stakeholder groups including new graduates and new graduate transition coordinators. The third phase involved the development of a Best Practices Toolkit based on the findings from the previous phases. The data for the second phase were derived from an online survey as well as focus groups. The survey was sent to 1,008 new graduates of whom 257 submitted completed questionnaires for a response rate of 26%. Twenty three focus groups were conducted across British Columbia with participants including new graduates (n = 48), nurse managers (n = 69) and Transition Program Coordinators (n = 9). Findings from this phase of the study, related to the components11 as well as the timing12 of transition programmes and the impact of transition programmes and access to supports on bullying,13 have also been published. Librarian’s role The librarian was asked to join the team as a co investigator early in the process and played a role in editing and reviewing the grant application before it was submitted. This early involvement was beneficial as it gave the librarian an opportunity to become familiar with the seminal literature in the area, which was used in the grant application, as well as the specific research question the principal investigators hoped to answer. At the beginning of Phase 1 of the study the librarian began to develop and test search strategies and make recommendations regarding its sensitivity and specificity. For this project, this sandbox stage was critical as the concept of a newly graduated nurse is somewhat amorphous. Hand in hand with this stage was the iterative process of developing inclusion and exclusion criteria. The librarian then went on to make suggestions for databases to search and drafted a search strategy and circulated it to the team for input. After the strategy was finalised, the searches were executed, all of the results were loaded into a shared RefWorks
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
117
118
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
account and duplicates were removed. With more than 3,000 papers in the account, it was clear that the sensitive search had produced many irrelevant results. Subsequently, the librarian did a high-level weed of the results to reduce the results to a manageable level before the co-principal investigators did the final screening. To ensure the search was as comprehensive as possible, the librarian also organised and conducted a survey of provincial and national nursing associations in Canada as an attempt to uncover relevant grey literature or studies that were in their nascent stages and were not yet published. Anything that was uncovered was added to the RefWorks account. The librarian was also involved in manuscript development and revisions of the integrative review paper that reported Phase 1 findings. The librarian contributed the Methods section and ensured formatting accuracy in the original submission. Revisions following the peer review process included a request for scoring of papers selected for final inclusion as to their level of evidence. Using established criteria, the librarian and coordinator developed a scoring matrix and independently rated the papers to assess inter rater agreement, which was computed as a fixed marginal kappa score the librarian had learned how to generate. During the second phase, the librarian did not participate in the collection or analysis of the primary research data. However, as data analysis unfolded, he was repeatedly asked to find published literature, to inform the development of subsequent manuscripts. Throughout the process, he engaged with the material at a deep enough level to make higher level intellectual contributions such as writing sections of the literature review for selected manuscripts and framing them in ways to showcase the research findings. For example in crafting the manuscript related to the timing of education on new graduate transition, the librarian critiqued existing research for its limitations in accounting for educational components running in parallel with other supports such as traditional orientation or preceptorship/mentorship, making it difficult to determine the unique influence of education on transition. In preparation for manuscript submission, an unanticipated task of the librarian was the
recommendation of journals in which to publish the various types of papers that would report study findings. Obvious criteria such as impact factor, indexing and maximum word counts were supplemented with the necessity to adhere to the funder’s policy on open access which stipulated that research outputs funded by the agency be made publically available 6 months after publication. The librarian also played an important role in the end of project knowledge translation activities. For example, the team held a 1 day wrap up meeting with major stakeholders to share the most salient findings from the study. The librarian created easy to read visual flow charts that helped simplify the search process and made the findings from the literature review accessible to the major stakeholders. Further, it afforded the librarian an opportunity to do more than just facilitate searching for evidence; it exposed him to the rich processes that are necessary to translate the evidence into practice. Results Every research team needs a librarian who is a core member of the investigative team and not a peripheral member. All too often researchers undervalue and underutilise their expertise because of a lack of awareness of the extent of their skill sets or certain assumptions they have about their contributions to research endeavours. The co authors had worked together on other research projects. As a result, the faculty member was well aware of the value the librarian brought to the team. This research initiative differed from other projects in consisting of multiple phases. Consequently, what the librarian brought to the research team traversed the entire research process from question identification to knowledge translation. For this reason, the librarian’s armament of skills needed to be woven throughout the research endeavour to maximise his valuable contributions in advancing our research work. Librarians are gateways to sources of knowledge because of their familiarity with the landscape of knowledge development. This librarian brought unique expertise to inform the research enterprise. His honed skills to appraise the landscape in the
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
area of new graduate transition assisted the team in refining, focusing and clarifying research questions, developing inclusion and exclusion criteria and selecting databases. His contributions enhanced the quality of the Phase 1 integrated literature review by helping the team to narrow the search to only papers that addressed new graduate transition programmes and to select the best evidence. Subsequent dissemination activities called for his thoughtful judgment on whether searches needed to be expanded or narrowed depending on the manuscript focus. Librarians are adept at culling relevant literature sources to inform manuscript development and other end of project knowledge development activities. The librarian was skilled at scanning and reviewing voluminous literature sources that allowed him to bring nuanced perspectives in crafting the development of ideas, arguments or trains of thought during the development of the four manuscripts. The librarian knew how to navigate the issues related to copyright and publication policies of funding agencies to assist researchers with compliance. This know how was extremely helpful and saved the team from selecting publication venues that did not fit with the funder’s requirement. Finally, the librarian was an invaluable coach for research coordinators and assistants, many who had limited training, in conducting productive searches and using library management systems such as RefWorks. Having the librarian on the team as a co investigators had a significant impact on the quality and progress of the project. His contributions saved the team immeasurable time and facilitated the work of meeting deadlines and milestones, which was critical to this intensive, three phase project. For example, the magnitude of the Phase 1 work involved in conducting searches for an integrative review was extensive and required his expertise that even at a minimum required 160 hours. This does not even include the time that he spent on additional activities such as searches for manuscript dissemination, correspondence with editors and dealing with copyright issues, and contributing to original writing and revision of manuscripts and final report that took place intermittently over approximately a 2 year period.
Discussion Process and results from the case study are discussed within the context of the wider academic literature. Librarian roles and motivations for joining research teams, faculty perspectives on the perceived benefits of their role and suggestions for future research will be addressed. Librarian roles Although the librarian in this case study did some work beyond the literature search stage, his core duties remained anchored in the traditional librarian roles of expert searcher and organiser of the literature. This role shares many similarities to those librarians working on research teams assume in support of the systematic review process that have been well documented elsewhere.5–7 It should be acknowledged that these review skills may be the gateway for the information professional onto the team. These skills are even codified in the grant application process among some granting agencies. In Canada, for instance, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research recommends working with librarians if researchers are to be successful in applying for knowledge synthesis grants.14 In contrast, other researchers have argued that one aspect of the embedded librarian in the research context is the librarian working with researchers more ‘upstream’ in the research process rather than just with the products produced at the end of the research life cycle.15 As such, the librarian on a research team would perform a range of tasks that might not fit the traditional mould of ‘librarian’s work’. In research sponsored by the Special Libraries Association, Roland and Glenn16 interviewed fourteen information professionals working on biomedical research teams to elucidate some of these non traditional tasks. These authors grouped the wide variety of these tasks into broad categories that ranged from grant and manuscript writing support to bioinformatics support, to original research and analysis. Other clinical researchers also report similar non traditional tasks performed by the health information professional on the research team, in particular, data collection and analysis and report writing.8
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
119
120
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
In this case study, the librarian certainly performed tasks that could be characterised as non traditional, in particular data collection, analysis, grant and manuscript writing. Regardless of whether the tasks librarians perform are characterised as traditional or non traditional, working on primary research teams can be seen as an evolutionary step in embedded librarianship; a step beyond being embedded in various faculties and departments but embedded with research teams within a department, or across departments, as the case may be. In many ways, this development parallels the ‘informationist’ role of the health information professional in the clinical setting. A role, it is argued that should not be as passive information ‘server’ but as an integral part of the health professional team with a specialised expertise that can contribute vitally to clinical situations in situ.17 To some degree, this evolution was repeated on a much smaller scale within this case study. Within Phase 1, the librarian acted more traditionally, but as the research moved on to the second phase, he developed greater subject expertise and was able to contribute more actively. Librarian motivations If participation on research teams involves an element of work outside the normal scope of what librarians do on a day-to-day basis, one might ask what these information professionals hope to gain by pushing the boundaries of their job descriptions. Lorenzetti and Rutherford9 interviewed four biomedical information professionals working in academic universities and teaching hospitals. They identified that the pursuit of authorship opportunities may be a key driver for joining research teams, especially if these librarians have academic status and the imperative to publish is a component of career advancement. Additionally, they identified that information professionals may agree be motivated to join research teams out of professional insecurity, concerned that if they turn down opportunities they might not arise again. In terms of non traditional tasks and services, Lorenzetti and Rutherford9 (p280) also advanced the idea that those librarians who can approach work on research teams as an opportunity for ‘professional learning and growth rather than simply an occasion to demonstrate
existing skills may find more opportunities to engage in research than those who cannot’. Roland and Glenn16 similarly found that participants in their study were unusually innovative and entrepreneurial compared with those who did not work on research teams. Not surprisingly, if research team participation is truly novel territory for librarians, those engaged in this area may indeed possess a degree of frontier spirit. To return to the case study, the librarian was motivated to join the team for a number of reasons. The lure of authorship was certainly one factor. Although he holds a tenured position, there are annual merit-based salary incentives that are, in part, linked to research productivity. Another motivation was the cultivation of a closer relationship with the nursing faculty member. The librarian has been a liaison to the School of Nursing for 10 years and has a fairly strong track record of collaborating with faculty within the classroom18 yet is always seeking ways to embed himself further. Another motivator was the challenge to do something novel and stimulating. He has long felt that career satisfaction is linked to a sense of challenge and continued professional growth. Faculty perspective A final area that has received scant attention in the literature is the perspective of the faculty member, particularly in relation to the benefit research teams gain from the skills that a librarian brings to the enterprise. Only, Seeley et al.8 noted that the research team benefited greatly from the health information professional’s objectivity and neutrality. In many ways, librarians are discipline agnostic, meaning that they can approach interdisciplinary research from a fresh perspective, unencumbered by, or unanchored to, traditional disciplinary lenses of enquiry. From the perspective of the co author, librarians may not always see their added value, or more strongly, the central role they could play on research teams. They need to actively promote their worth to research teams. Often librarians support academic faculty members in various capacities related to teaching and research but may hesitate to be more proactive in letting researchers know
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
how they could contribute as co investigators. A marketing suggestion would be for them to create biographical profiles that describe the various skills they bring to the research process and the various capacities in which they have served on research teams. Librarians might also take advantage of opportunities to participate in information sessions offered by their institutional office of research services. This would give them exposure and visibility across campus as to the central role they could play on research teams. Future research Aside from small scale qualitative studies8,9, very little research has been performed regarding librarians working on research teams. As a result, a national or international survey would be beneficial to begin to quantify the degree to which librarians are participating on research teams, enumerate the types of roles and tasks they are performing and compile best practice strategies for joining teams from those working on teams. It is important to establish this baseline data to chart the change over time. Moreover, depending on the types of tasks that are being performed, recommendations could be made for the development of a professional skills toolkit for those interested in pursuing greater involvement on research teams. Lastly, it would be helpful to uncover attempts to formally assess the effects of these novel services on the success of research teams. Future research might expand the faculty view of including librarians on a research team. A survey or interview could be broadened to include a greater pool of faculty members to learn about their choices to work with information professionals in the research context. Another group of interest would be library administrators. Ultimately, the degree to which they see these endeavours aligning with the strategic goals of the library and institution, and the degree to which they get supported, will play a role in the evolution of librarians on research teams. Conclusion The NewGIT research project is an example of interprofessional research and an interorganisational
partnership that has helped further our understanding of the integration of new nurse graduates into the acute care workplace. It was a collaborative effort between, among others, a faculty member and an academic librarian. Librarians and faculty have a well developed history of collaborating in the classroom but less so on research teams. This case study has demonstrated that librarians can play a valuable role on research teams that can span the entire research process from question identification to dissemination. As a result, work on research teams is certainly an avenue that librarians may choose to explore to further integrate into the processes of the academy and expand their relevance. References 1 Lewis, D. W. A strategy for academic libraries in the first quarter of the 21st century. College & Research Libraries 2007, 68, 418–434. 2 Klem, M., Saghafi, E., Abromitis, R., Stover, A., Dew, M. A. & Pilkonis, P. Building PROMIS item banks: librarians as co-investigators. Quality of Life Research 2009, 18, 881–888. 3 Barnard, A., Nash, R. & O’Brien, M. Information literacy: developing lifelong skills through nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education 2005, 44, 505–510. 4 Miller, L. C., Jones, B. B., Graves, R. S. & Sievert, M. C. Merging silos: collaborating for information literacy. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 2010, 41, 267–272. 5 Dudden, R. F. & Protzko, S. L. The systematic review team: contributions of the health sciences librarian. Medical Reference Services Quarterly 2011, 30, 301–315. 6 Swinkels, A., Briddon, J. & Hall, J. Two physiotherapists, one librarian and a systematic literature review: collaboration in action. Health Information and Libraries Journal 2006, 23, 248–256. 7 Harris, M. R. The librarian’s roles in the systematic review process: a case study. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2005, 93, 81–87. 8 Seeley, H., Urquhart, C., Hutchinson, P. & Pickard, J. Developing the role of a health information professional in a clinical research setting. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2010, 5, 47–62. 9 Lorenzetti, D. L. & Rutherford, G. Information professionals’ participation in interdisciplinary research: a preliminary study of factors affecting successful collaborations. Health Information and Libraries Journal 2012, 29, 274–284. 10 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Lilly, M. & Janke, R. Best practices of new graduate transition programs: a literature synthesis. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2013, 50, 345–356. 11 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Janke, R. & Ghement, I. Orientation and transition program component predictors of new graduate workplace integration. Journal of Nursing Management 2013. [Epub ahead of print].
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
121
122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush 12 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Janke, R., Gordon, J. & Ghement, I. The helpfulness and timing of education: relationships with new graduate transition. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development 2013, 29, 191–196. 13 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Janke, R. & Ghement, I. New graduate transition programs: relationships with access to support and bullying. Contemporary Nurse 2014. [Epub ahead of print]. 14 Grimshaw, J. (2010). A guide to knowledge synthesis. Available from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/41382.html. 15 Carlson, J. & Kneale, R. Embedded librarianship in the research context: navigating new waters. College & Research Libraries News 2011, 72, 167–170. 16 Rolland, B. & Glenn, E. J. (2010). Experimenting outside the information center: Non-traditional roles for information
professionals in biomedical research. Available from: https:// www.sla.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2008SLAResGrant. pdf. 17 Giuse, N. B. Advancing the practice of clinical medical librarianship. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1997, 85, 437–438. 18 Janke, R., Pesut, B. & Erbacker, L. Promoting health information literacy through collaborative service learning in an undergraduate research course. Nurse Education Today 2012, 32, 920–923. Received 17 July 2013; Accepted 28 April 2014
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
The academic librarian as co-investigator on an interprofessional primary research team: a case study Robert Janke* & Kathy L Rush† *Library, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC, Canada, and †School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna, BC, Canada
Abstract Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the role librarians play on research teams. The experiences of a librarian and a faculty member are situated within the wider literature addressing collaborations between health science librarians and research faculty. Methods: A case study approach is used to outline the involvement of a librarian on a team created to investigate the best practices for integrating nurses into the workplace during their first year of practice. Results: Librarians contribute to research teams including expertise in the entire process of knowledge development and dissemination including the ability to navigate issues related to copyright and open access policies of funding agencies. Discussion: The librarian reviews the various tasks performed as part of the research team ranging from the grant application, to working on the initial literature review as well as the subsequent manuscripts that emerged from the primary research. The motivations for joining the research team, including authorship and relationship building, are also discussed. Recommendations are also made in terms of how librarians could increase their participation on research teams. Conclusion: The study shows that librarians can play a key role on interprofessional primary research teams. Keywords: case studies; inter-professional working; librarians, library services; research skills.
Key Messages
• • • •
Librarians can play a valuable role on research teams that can span the entire research process from question identification to dissemination. A willingness to work outside of the traditional roles of librarians may be a prerequisite for involvement and successful research team participation. Librarians on research teams may be one way to boost their visibility and profile on campus. Future research should attempt to establish how widespread this activity is and should include the perspective of faculty members and library administrators.
Introduction In these transformative times, one strategy for libraries to adopt to remain vibrant and relevant is to reposition and embed their expertise into the
Correspondence: Robert Janke, Library, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Kelowna BC Canada, VIV1V7, E-mail: [email protected]
116
teaching, learning and research enterprises of the academy.1 A scan of the literature, which focused on librarians and nursing faculty, revealed a robust body of literature detailing collaboration in the university classroom to develop information literacy and evidence based practice skills.2–4 These collaborations have emphasised researching a topic of joint interest, such as information literacy, as an interdisciplinary venture. Literature concerning
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
collaboration with faculty outside of the classroom, specifically in terms of librarians working on interprofessional primary research teams, is far more underdeveloped. Specifically, the contribution that librarians make to these teams through the application of their professional expertise has received little attention. The role of librarians on teams working on systematic reviews has been well studied5–7, but the librarian contribution as an interprofessional member of a ‘primary research team’, conducting original research, has yet to be elaborated. Aside from small scale qualitative studies8,9, very little research has been performed regarding librarians working on research teams. Therefore, the purpose of this case study was to document collaboration between a librarian and a nursing faculty member. The specific objectives included the following: (i) to describe librarian and faculty members experience of working together on an interprofessional primary research team; (ii) to evaluate the value of the librarian role on the team from librarian and faculty member perspectives; and (iii) to consider findings in the light of the existing literature in this area. Academic librarians may or may not hold faculty appointments, a factor that may influence the nature and types of contributions they make. For the purposes of this paper, the term ‘faculty’ will not include librarians. Methods Case study: the new graduate integration team The New Graduate Integration Team (NewGIT) was formed to investigate the best practices for integrating post registration nurses in their first year of practice into the acute care workplace. The co-principal investigators brought together experience from both academic and practice settings. The research was ultimately funded by an 18 month $150 000 grant from a provincial funding agency. The grant application included a budget for a research coordinator, who was hired shortly after the grant was awarded. The budget also included 80 hours of funding to pay the library for the librarian’s time. The NewGIT research was designed to be multi-phasic. The first phase involved an integrative literature review to determine best practices
for integrating new graduate nurses in the workplace, the results of which have already been published.10 The second phase involved a mixed methods study designed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the application of new nurse graduate transition best practices in selected British Columbia hospitals from the perspective of multiple stakeholder groups including new graduates and new graduate transition coordinators. The third phase involved the development of a Best Practices Toolkit based on the findings from the previous phases. The data for the second phase were derived from an online survey as well as focus groups. The survey was sent to 1,008 new graduates of whom 257 submitted completed questionnaires for a response rate of 26%. Twenty three focus groups were conducted across British Columbia with participants including new graduates (n = 48), nurse managers (n = 69) and Transition Program Coordinators (n = 9). Findings from this phase of the study, related to the components11 as well as the timing12 of transition programmes and the impact of transition programmes and access to supports on bullying,13 have also been published. Librarian’s role The librarian was asked to join the team as a co investigator early in the process and played a role in editing and reviewing the grant application before it was submitted. This early involvement was beneficial as it gave the librarian an opportunity to become familiar with the seminal literature in the area, which was used in the grant application, as well as the specific research question the principal investigators hoped to answer. At the beginning of Phase 1 of the study the librarian began to develop and test search strategies and make recommendations regarding its sensitivity and specificity. For this project, this sandbox stage was critical as the concept of a newly graduated nurse is somewhat amorphous. Hand in hand with this stage was the iterative process of developing inclusion and exclusion criteria. The librarian then went on to make suggestions for databases to search and drafted a search strategy and circulated it to the team for input. After the strategy was finalised, the searches were executed, all of the results were loaded into a shared RefWorks
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
117
118
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
account and duplicates were removed. With more than 3,000 papers in the account, it was clear that the sensitive search had produced many irrelevant results. Subsequently, the librarian did a high-level weed of the results to reduce the results to a manageable level before the co-principal investigators did the final screening. To ensure the search was as comprehensive as possible, the librarian also organised and conducted a survey of provincial and national nursing associations in Canada as an attempt to uncover relevant grey literature or studies that were in their nascent stages and were not yet published. Anything that was uncovered was added to the RefWorks account. The librarian was also involved in manuscript development and revisions of the integrative review paper that reported Phase 1 findings. The librarian contributed the Methods section and ensured formatting accuracy in the original submission. Revisions following the peer review process included a request for scoring of papers selected for final inclusion as to their level of evidence. Using established criteria, the librarian and coordinator developed a scoring matrix and independently rated the papers to assess inter rater agreement, which was computed as a fixed marginal kappa score the librarian had learned how to generate. During the second phase, the librarian did not participate in the collection or analysis of the primary research data. However, as data analysis unfolded, he was repeatedly asked to find published literature, to inform the development of subsequent manuscripts. Throughout the process, he engaged with the material at a deep enough level to make higher level intellectual contributions such as writing sections of the literature review for selected manuscripts and framing them in ways to showcase the research findings. For example in crafting the manuscript related to the timing of education on new graduate transition, the librarian critiqued existing research for its limitations in accounting for educational components running in parallel with other supports such as traditional orientation or preceptorship/mentorship, making it difficult to determine the unique influence of education on transition. In preparation for manuscript submission, an unanticipated task of the librarian was the
recommendation of journals in which to publish the various types of papers that would report study findings. Obvious criteria such as impact factor, indexing and maximum word counts were supplemented with the necessity to adhere to the funder’s policy on open access which stipulated that research outputs funded by the agency be made publically available 6 months after publication. The librarian also played an important role in the end of project knowledge translation activities. For example, the team held a 1 day wrap up meeting with major stakeholders to share the most salient findings from the study. The librarian created easy to read visual flow charts that helped simplify the search process and made the findings from the literature review accessible to the major stakeholders. Further, it afforded the librarian an opportunity to do more than just facilitate searching for evidence; it exposed him to the rich processes that are necessary to translate the evidence into practice. Results Every research team needs a librarian who is a core member of the investigative team and not a peripheral member. All too often researchers undervalue and underutilise their expertise because of a lack of awareness of the extent of their skill sets or certain assumptions they have about their contributions to research endeavours. The co authors had worked together on other research projects. As a result, the faculty member was well aware of the value the librarian brought to the team. This research initiative differed from other projects in consisting of multiple phases. Consequently, what the librarian brought to the research team traversed the entire research process from question identification to knowledge translation. For this reason, the librarian’s armament of skills needed to be woven throughout the research endeavour to maximise his valuable contributions in advancing our research work. Librarians are gateways to sources of knowledge because of their familiarity with the landscape of knowledge development. This librarian brought unique expertise to inform the research enterprise. His honed skills to appraise the landscape in the
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
area of new graduate transition assisted the team in refining, focusing and clarifying research questions, developing inclusion and exclusion criteria and selecting databases. His contributions enhanced the quality of the Phase 1 integrated literature review by helping the team to narrow the search to only papers that addressed new graduate transition programmes and to select the best evidence. Subsequent dissemination activities called for his thoughtful judgment on whether searches needed to be expanded or narrowed depending on the manuscript focus. Librarians are adept at culling relevant literature sources to inform manuscript development and other end of project knowledge development activities. The librarian was skilled at scanning and reviewing voluminous literature sources that allowed him to bring nuanced perspectives in crafting the development of ideas, arguments or trains of thought during the development of the four manuscripts. The librarian knew how to navigate the issues related to copyright and publication policies of funding agencies to assist researchers with compliance. This know how was extremely helpful and saved the team from selecting publication venues that did not fit with the funder’s requirement. Finally, the librarian was an invaluable coach for research coordinators and assistants, many who had limited training, in conducting productive searches and using library management systems such as RefWorks. Having the librarian on the team as a co investigators had a significant impact on the quality and progress of the project. His contributions saved the team immeasurable time and facilitated the work of meeting deadlines and milestones, which was critical to this intensive, three phase project. For example, the magnitude of the Phase 1 work involved in conducting searches for an integrative review was extensive and required his expertise that even at a minimum required 160 hours. This does not even include the time that he spent on additional activities such as searches for manuscript dissemination, correspondence with editors and dealing with copyright issues, and contributing to original writing and revision of manuscripts and final report that took place intermittently over approximately a 2 year period.
Discussion Process and results from the case study are discussed within the context of the wider academic literature. Librarian roles and motivations for joining research teams, faculty perspectives on the perceived benefits of their role and suggestions for future research will be addressed. Librarian roles Although the librarian in this case study did some work beyond the literature search stage, his core duties remained anchored in the traditional librarian roles of expert searcher and organiser of the literature. This role shares many similarities to those librarians working on research teams assume in support of the systematic review process that have been well documented elsewhere.5–7 It should be acknowledged that these review skills may be the gateway for the information professional onto the team. These skills are even codified in the grant application process among some granting agencies. In Canada, for instance, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research recommends working with librarians if researchers are to be successful in applying for knowledge synthesis grants.14 In contrast, other researchers have argued that one aspect of the embedded librarian in the research context is the librarian working with researchers more ‘upstream’ in the research process rather than just with the products produced at the end of the research life cycle.15 As such, the librarian on a research team would perform a range of tasks that might not fit the traditional mould of ‘librarian’s work’. In research sponsored by the Special Libraries Association, Roland and Glenn16 interviewed fourteen information professionals working on biomedical research teams to elucidate some of these non traditional tasks. These authors grouped the wide variety of these tasks into broad categories that ranged from grant and manuscript writing support to bioinformatics support, to original research and analysis. Other clinical researchers also report similar non traditional tasks performed by the health information professional on the research team, in particular, data collection and analysis and report writing.8
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
119
120
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
In this case study, the librarian certainly performed tasks that could be characterised as non traditional, in particular data collection, analysis, grant and manuscript writing. Regardless of whether the tasks librarians perform are characterised as traditional or non traditional, working on primary research teams can be seen as an evolutionary step in embedded librarianship; a step beyond being embedded in various faculties and departments but embedded with research teams within a department, or across departments, as the case may be. In many ways, this development parallels the ‘informationist’ role of the health information professional in the clinical setting. A role, it is argued that should not be as passive information ‘server’ but as an integral part of the health professional team with a specialised expertise that can contribute vitally to clinical situations in situ.17 To some degree, this evolution was repeated on a much smaller scale within this case study. Within Phase 1, the librarian acted more traditionally, but as the research moved on to the second phase, he developed greater subject expertise and was able to contribute more actively. Librarian motivations If participation on research teams involves an element of work outside the normal scope of what librarians do on a day-to-day basis, one might ask what these information professionals hope to gain by pushing the boundaries of their job descriptions. Lorenzetti and Rutherford9 interviewed four biomedical information professionals working in academic universities and teaching hospitals. They identified that the pursuit of authorship opportunities may be a key driver for joining research teams, especially if these librarians have academic status and the imperative to publish is a component of career advancement. Additionally, they identified that information professionals may agree be motivated to join research teams out of professional insecurity, concerned that if they turn down opportunities they might not arise again. In terms of non traditional tasks and services, Lorenzetti and Rutherford9 (p280) also advanced the idea that those librarians who can approach work on research teams as an opportunity for ‘professional learning and growth rather than simply an occasion to demonstrate
existing skills may find more opportunities to engage in research than those who cannot’. Roland and Glenn16 similarly found that participants in their study were unusually innovative and entrepreneurial compared with those who did not work on research teams. Not surprisingly, if research team participation is truly novel territory for librarians, those engaged in this area may indeed possess a degree of frontier spirit. To return to the case study, the librarian was motivated to join the team for a number of reasons. The lure of authorship was certainly one factor. Although he holds a tenured position, there are annual merit-based salary incentives that are, in part, linked to research productivity. Another motivation was the cultivation of a closer relationship with the nursing faculty member. The librarian has been a liaison to the School of Nursing for 10 years and has a fairly strong track record of collaborating with faculty within the classroom18 yet is always seeking ways to embed himself further. Another motivator was the challenge to do something novel and stimulating. He has long felt that career satisfaction is linked to a sense of challenge and continued professional growth. Faculty perspective A final area that has received scant attention in the literature is the perspective of the faculty member, particularly in relation to the benefit research teams gain from the skills that a librarian brings to the enterprise. Only, Seeley et al.8 noted that the research team benefited greatly from the health information professional’s objectivity and neutrality. In many ways, librarians are discipline agnostic, meaning that they can approach interdisciplinary research from a fresh perspective, unencumbered by, or unanchored to, traditional disciplinary lenses of enquiry. From the perspective of the co author, librarians may not always see their added value, or more strongly, the central role they could play on research teams. They need to actively promote their worth to research teams. Often librarians support academic faculty members in various capacities related to teaching and research but may hesitate to be more proactive in letting researchers know
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush
how they could contribute as co investigators. A marketing suggestion would be for them to create biographical profiles that describe the various skills they bring to the research process and the various capacities in which they have served on research teams. Librarians might also take advantage of opportunities to participate in information sessions offered by their institutional office of research services. This would give them exposure and visibility across campus as to the central role they could play on research teams. Future research Aside from small scale qualitative studies8,9, very little research has been performed regarding librarians working on research teams. As a result, a national or international survey would be beneficial to begin to quantify the degree to which librarians are participating on research teams, enumerate the types of roles and tasks they are performing and compile best practice strategies for joining teams from those working on teams. It is important to establish this baseline data to chart the change over time. Moreover, depending on the types of tasks that are being performed, recommendations could be made for the development of a professional skills toolkit for those interested in pursuing greater involvement on research teams. Lastly, it would be helpful to uncover attempts to formally assess the effects of these novel services on the success of research teams. Future research might expand the faculty view of including librarians on a research team. A survey or interview could be broadened to include a greater pool of faculty members to learn about their choices to work with information professionals in the research context. Another group of interest would be library administrators. Ultimately, the degree to which they see these endeavours aligning with the strategic goals of the library and institution, and the degree to which they get supported, will play a role in the evolution of librarians on research teams. Conclusion The NewGIT research project is an example of interprofessional research and an interorganisational
partnership that has helped further our understanding of the integration of new nurse graduates into the acute care workplace. It was a collaborative effort between, among others, a faculty member and an academic librarian. Librarians and faculty have a well developed history of collaborating in the classroom but less so on research teams. This case study has demonstrated that librarians can play a valuable role on research teams that can span the entire research process from question identification to dissemination. As a result, work on research teams is certainly an avenue that librarians may choose to explore to further integrate into the processes of the academy and expand their relevance. References 1 Lewis, D. W. A strategy for academic libraries in the first quarter of the 21st century. College & Research Libraries 2007, 68, 418–434. 2 Klem, M., Saghafi, E., Abromitis, R., Stover, A., Dew, M. A. & Pilkonis, P. Building PROMIS item banks: librarians as co-investigators. Quality of Life Research 2009, 18, 881–888. 3 Barnard, A., Nash, R. & O’Brien, M. Information literacy: developing lifelong skills through nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education 2005, 44, 505–510. 4 Miller, L. C., Jones, B. B., Graves, R. S. & Sievert, M. C. Merging silos: collaborating for information literacy. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 2010, 41, 267–272. 5 Dudden, R. F. & Protzko, S. L. The systematic review team: contributions of the health sciences librarian. Medical Reference Services Quarterly 2011, 30, 301–315. 6 Swinkels, A., Briddon, J. & Hall, J. Two physiotherapists, one librarian and a systematic literature review: collaboration in action. Health Information and Libraries Journal 2006, 23, 248–256. 7 Harris, M. R. The librarian’s roles in the systematic review process: a case study. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2005, 93, 81–87. 8 Seeley, H., Urquhart, C., Hutchinson, P. & Pickard, J. Developing the role of a health information professional in a clinical research setting. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2010, 5, 47–62. 9 Lorenzetti, D. L. & Rutherford, G. Information professionals’ participation in interdisciplinary research: a preliminary study of factors affecting successful collaborations. Health Information and Libraries Journal 2012, 29, 274–284. 10 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Lilly, M. & Janke, R. Best practices of new graduate transition programs: a literature synthesis. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2013, 50, 345–356. 11 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Janke, R. & Ghement, I. Orientation and transition program component predictors of new graduate workplace integration. Journal of Nursing Management 2013. [Epub ahead of print].
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
121
122
Academic librarian as co investigator, Robert Janke & Kathy L Rush 12 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Janke, R., Gordon, J. & Ghement, I. The helpfulness and timing of education: relationships with new graduate transition. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development 2013, 29, 191–196. 13 Rush, K. L., Adamack, M., Gordon, J., Janke, R. & Ghement, I. New graduate transition programs: relationships with access to support and bullying. Contemporary Nurse 2014. [Epub ahead of print]. 14 Grimshaw, J. (2010). A guide to knowledge synthesis. Available from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/41382.html. 15 Carlson, J. & Kneale, R. Embedded librarianship in the research context: navigating new waters. College & Research Libraries News 2011, 72, 167–170. 16 Rolland, B. & Glenn, E. J. (2010). Experimenting outside the information center: Non-traditional roles for information
professionals in biomedical research. Available from: https:// www.sla.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2008SLAResGrant. pdf. 17 Giuse, N. B. Advancing the practice of clinical medical librarianship. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1997, 85, 437–438. 18 Janke, R., Pesut, B. & Erbacker, L. Promoting health information literacy through collaborative service learning in an undergraduate research course. Nurse Education Today 2012, 32, 920–923. Received 17 July 2013; Accepted 28 April 2014
© 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31, pp. 116–122
