Understanding our impact: Analyzing librarian involvement with systematic reviews

Objectives: On a medical campus, systematic reviews with librarian co-authors compared to reviews without librarians were published in journals with lower impact factors, although still within the comparative range. To try to determine why, discipline and authors’ publishing experience were examined. The bibliographic analysis was also expanded to see if there is a difference in the journal ranks by discipline. Methods: Search strategies were created to pull systematic reviews published in the last five years by campus authors from PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Citations were exported and deduped using EndNote X8. The systematic reviews were grouped by whether a librarian from our campus assisted with the search or not by searching for librarians’ names in the author field. A statistically appropriate number of articles without a librarian author were randomly selected for comparison with articles that had librarian assistance. Selected articles were analyzed based on Journal Impact Factor for the year of publication, journal rank by discipline, authors’ discipline(s), and years of authors’ publication experience. Authors’ years of experience are determined by the date of their first published article. Results: Systematic reviews with the assistance of a librarian were statistically no different from those without a librarian in terms of the Journal Impact Factor or journal rank by discipline where systematic reviews were published. Years of experience significantly differed between groups, with librarians assisting most authors with 5 years or fewer of experience. The departments who utilized librarians for systematic searching the most were: General Medicine, Orthopedics, and Gastroenterology. Conclusions: This exploratory research helped evaluate who our librarians are primarily working with on systematic reviews. It also informed us that we do not have an impact on the systematic review being published in a higher impact journal based on Journal Impact Factor or rank by discipline. Our liaison efforts will focus less on the three departments listed above as they already utilize our service. Since most of the authors we assisted had 5 years of experience, we will target the campus faculty onboarding orientation

General ecosystem health indicators – A scoping review

Background: Assessing the health status of a natural ecosystem is important across all natural fields of study. Ecologists have discussed and used a variety of terms to describe the health of ecosystems, yet consistent use or adoption of a set of terms has not been established. A common vernacular is necessary to convey the status of an ecosystem to any audience, particularly to influence policy. The purpose of this review is to explore the terms associated with general ecosystem health metrics. Methods: A scoping literature review was performed within three databases, using a search string informed by place, interest, and outcome, a modified PICO (Place, Interest, Comparison, Outcome) structure. A three-stage review process was conducted, at title only, abstract, and full text, respectively. The second and third stages were conducted by two independent reviewers. Key ecosystem health indicator terms were extracted from the final article list and categorized into composite terms or individual indicators for the assessment of general ecosystem health. Results: The initial search yielded 4733 articles, of which 701 were included for screening at the abstract level. A subsequent full-text review of 118 peer-reviewed articles found 95 distinct indicators and 109 multi-metric index systems that qualify under the study search criteria from a total of 64 scientific journals over 20 years. Conclusions: We found a substantial diversity of ecological health terminologies and concepts, reflecting various scientific traditions and disciplines, which highlight not only the necessity to standardize the language for communication but also the opportunity for cross-fertilization. Single distinct indicators were as frequently used as multi-metric index systems. For academic purposes, this raises the question of how underlying value statements and ethical dimensions differ between integrated health terminologies and concepts. For advocacy, we emphasize the need of a consistent core terminology to improve the effectiveness of our messaging

EverCloud

The project team designed a modular phone platform based on cloud computing that could be personalized and easily updated so that phones wouldn't become outmoded so quickly. The modular design would make it easier to replace broken parts or swap them out for a new style. And the user's contacts, games and other information would be stored on a central server rather than the handset, speeding up processing time. The five-person team was comprised of industrial design students from Auburn University. The project won the Platinum award in the Prevention category.Ope