Information Needs and Barriers to Access for School Nurses: A Narrative Review

Abstract Objectives: The purpose of this study is to determine what the literature shows about the daily information needs of public-school nurses, as well as about their information preferences, behaviors, and barriers to searching and accessing this information. Methods: CINAHL, LISTA, PubMed, and ERIC were searched for literature on the information needs of school nurses within the US and barriers to their professional development. Statistics were collected concerning the school-age population within the author’s state of residence. Results: Our findings indicate that school nurses are an underserved population. They rarely have access to paid resources and are expected to seek out professional development on their own time with their own resources. The research suggests they want to learn but lack the time and resources to do so. Statistics indicate an increase in school-age children with complex healthcare needs. Conclusion: Librarians need to determine how best to support the complex information needs of public-school nurses. Next steps include conducting a needs assessment and developing an accessible intervention

An Evaluation of Point of Care Tools by Nurses: How Do They Compare?

To answer clinical questions quickly at the bedsides, healthcarepractitioners need point-of-care tools (PoCTs). Little research has been done on healthcare practitioner’s opinions of these tools, even less targeting nurses specifically. This study compared three PoCTs from a nursing perspective to determine which resource best met the unique information needs of practicing registered nurses the University of Illinois Hospital (UIH). The investigators hypothesized the most nursing centric tool, Nursing Reference Center Plus, would be preferred.</div

Dataset for "Knowing What We Don't Know: A Survey of School Nurse Information Needs"

This is the dataset for the manuscript, "Knowing what we don't know: A survey of school nurse information needs." Nickum, Annie “Nicky, Rosie Hanneke, and Robin Shannon. "Knowing What We Don’t Know: A Survey of School Nurse Information Needs." The Journal of School Nursing (2023): 10598405231193361. </p

Partners on the Health Care Team: Librarians Collaborating with Nurses

Librarians are useful members of the healthcare team and can assist practicing nurses with answering clinical questions. https://nlmdirector.nlm.nih.gov/2022/01/12/partners-on-the-health-care-team-librarians-collaborating-with-nurses/</p

Librarians on the Healthcare Team

Health science librarians are important members of the healthcare team. Many hospitals have their own librarian or have access to one through their associated university. Many librarians manage collections (including print and electronic materials), plan events and programs, and provide instruction. They form partnerships with hospital staff, attend rounds with healthcare practitioners, collaborate on systematic reviews, and serve on hospital-wide councils.</p

Developing a Controlled Vocabulary for Curriculum Mapping: A Case Study

The development of a controlled vocabulary list to best map objectives in an undergraduate medical curriculum in order to meet LCME standards

Knowing What We Don’t Know: A Survey of School Nurse Information Needs

Providing complex care for students requires an informed school nurse workforce. However, school nurses, many of whom work independently, may not know where to find necessary information. This study seeks to understand the information needs of school nurses by conducting a needs assessment survey within the state of Illinois. A survey was disseminated through three statewide professional listservs to determine the types of care-related questions school nurses ask as part of their regular duties and which resources they use to answer those questions. School nurses’ information needs vary widely, and they rely on numerous sources to answer clinical questions. They are responsible for the well-being of hundreds to thousands of children. While they are comfortable searching for information, they are motivated to further develop research skills

A comparative evaluation of three point-of-care tools by registered nurses

Objective: This study compared three point-of-care tools (PoCTs) to determine which PoCT was rated highest based on key features and characteristics by registered nurses. Methods: The PoCTs reviewed were Nursing Reference Center Plus, ClinicalKey for Nursing, and UpToDate. Nurses were asked to use each PoCT to answer three clinical questions and then rate their experience based on the following areas: currency, relevancy, layout, navigation, labeling, and use of filters. They were also asked to indicate their familiarity with each PoCT, their overall opinions, and demographic information. Results: Seventy-six nurses completed the entire survey. Ratings of PoCTs did not differ by participant characteristics. Participants were most familiar with UpToDate, and average ratings were similar across all three PoCTs. Answers to open-ended questions suggested that nurses’ experiences searching and locating relevant information to address clinical questions varied and that brand recognition might have impacted preference. Discussion: None of the PoCTs was significantly preferred over the others, nor received high ratings, which suggests that organizations need to survey their nurses to determine which PoCT is preferred by their staff. Findings also suggest that institutional priorities can guide the decision whether a library should license multiple PoCTs, nursing, and/or non-nursing specific PoCTs. Research is needed to understand how PoCTs could better meet the information needs of registered nurses. Librarians should learn more about what types of information nurses are seeking and explore opportunities to educate nurses on how to better utilize PoCTs for their practice

Focus on nursing point-of-care tools: application of a new evaluation rubric

Objective: Point-of-care tools (PoCTs) provide evidence-based information on patient care and procedures at the time of need. Registered nurses have unique practice needs, and many PoCTs are marketed to support their practice. However, there is little reported evidence in the literature about evaluating nursing-focused PoCTs Case Presentation: The investigators developed a rubric containing evaluation criteria based on content, coverage of nursing topics, transparency of the evidence, user perception, and customization of PoCTs for supporting nursing practice. The investigators selected five PoCTs cited in the literature and of interest to local nursing leadership: ClinicalKey for Nursing, DynaMed, Lippincott’s Advisor and Procedures, Nursing Reference Center Plus, and UpToDate. Application of the rubric found Lippincott had the highest coverage of diagnoses, while ClinicalKey for Nursing had strong content focused on interventions and outcomes. Nursing Reference Center Plus provided the most well-rounded coverage of nursing terminology and topics. DynaMed and UpToDate were more transparent with indicating conflict of interest, but both had lower coverage of nursing terminology, content, and care processes.   Conclusion: None of the five PoCTs strongly met all of the evaluated criteria. The rubric developed for this study highlights each PoCT’s strengths and weaknesses that can then be used to inform the decision-making process based on priorities and budget. The investigators recommend licensing a nursing PoCT and a PoCT like DynaMed or UpToDate to provide comprehensive, evidence-based, patient care coverage and to meet the diverse information needs of nurses

Exploring the Use of Common Strict Search Criteria in Nursing Literature Searches.

BACKGROUND: Health sciences librarians and nursing journal contributors have expressed concern about the impact of using strict parameters when searching the literature. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the use of strict search criteria (eg, 5-year rule, "nurse as author") by direct care nurses and nursing students. METHODS: Fourteen online focus groups were conducted with 54 participants: direct care nurses, health sciences librarians, nursing faculty, and nursing students. Nursing faculty and health sciences librarians were included as participants to add perspective to the origins and effects of the use of stringent search criteria. RESULTS: The majority of the nurses viewed the 5-year rule and nurse as author search limits favorably, while noting that a strict date range may hamper successful searching. Librarians viewed these search criteria more unfavorably but recognized the value of topic-appropriate search limits. CONCLUSION: Reliance on strict limits can be detrimental to pertinent results; however, appropriate use is essential for relevant results. Pedagogy focused on searching the nursing literature needs to emphasize that limits are tools to be used judiciously