OCRIS : online catalogue and repository interoperability study. Final report

The aims and objectives of OCRIS were to: • Survey the extent to which repository content is in scope for institutional library OPACs, and the extent to which it is already recorded there; • Examine the interoperability of OPAC and repository software for the exchange of metadata and other information; • List the various services to institutional managers, researchers, teachers and learners offered respectively by OPACs and repositories; • Identify the potential for improvements in the links (e.g. using link resolver technology) from repositories and/or OPACs to other institutional services, such as finance or research administration; • Make recommendations for the development of possible further links between library OPACs and institutional repositories, identifying the benefits to relevant stakeholder groups

The DiSCmap project : digitisation of special collections: mapping, assessment, prioritisation

The paper presents the outcomes of DiSCmap, a JISC and RIN-funded project which aimed to study users' priorities for digitisation of special collections within the context of the higher education institutions in the UK. The project produced a 'long list' of 945 collections nominated for digitisation by intermediaries and end users and a user-driven prioritisation framework. Web surveys were used as a tool to gather data in combination with focus groups and telephone interviews with end users helped to get additional insights on their views in particular domains. The project developed an online forum and a group in Facebook in order to find to what extent the social networking technologies can be used to sustain a professional informal community but this did not prove to be successful. Over 1000 specialists took part in the different forms used to gather intermediaries and end users' nominations of collections for the "long list" and opinions about digitisation priorities. The long list of 945 special collections nominated for digitisation can be useful as an evidence of identified user interest; this list is not seen as a "snapshot" but as an outcome which needs to be sustained and further developed in the future. A user-driven framework for prioritizing digitisation was produced; it fits well with the current JISC digitisation strategy, providing a further level of detail on user priorities. The project also suggests a flexible approach for prioritizing collections for digitisation based on the use of the framework in combination with the long list of collections. The project did not make a representative study; the participation of intermediaries and end users was a matter of good will. Yet, special collections from 44% of the higher education institutions in the UK were nominated to the long list. The work on the project provided new insights and evidence on the user priorities in digitisation of special collections. It also suggests a user-driven digitisation prioritization framework which would be of benefit in future decision making

DiSCmap : digitisation of special collections mapping, assessment, prioritisation. Final project report

Traditionally, digitisation has been led by supply rather than demand. While end users are seen as a priority they are not directly consulted about which collections they would like to have made available digitally or why. This can be seen in a wide range of policy documents throughout the cultural heritage sector, where users are positioned as central but where their preferences are assumed rather than solicited. Post-digitisation consultation with end users isequally rare. How are we to know that digitisation is serving the needs of the Higher Education community and is sustainable in the long-term? The 'Digitisation in Special Collections: mapping, assessment and prioritisation' (DiSCmap) project, funded by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Research Information Network (RIN), aimed to:- Identify priority collections for potential digitisation housed within UK Higher Education's libraries, archives and museums as well as faculties and departments.- Assess users' needs and demand for Special Collections to be digitised across all disciplines.- Produce a synthesis of available knowledge about users' needs with regard to usability and format of digitised resources.- Provide recommendations for a strategic approach to digitisation within the wider context and activity of leading players both in the public and commercial sector.The project was carried out jointly by the Centre for Digital Library Research (CDLR) and the Centre for Research in Library and Information Management (CERLIM) and has taken a collaborative approach to the creation of a user-driven digitisation prioritisation framework, encouraging participation and collective engagement between communities.Between September 2008 and March 2009 the DiSCmap project team asked over 1,000 users, including intermediaries (vocational users who take care of collections) and end users (university teachers, researchers and students) a variety of questions about which physical and digital Special Collections they make use of and what criteria they feel must be considered when selecting materials for digitisation. This was achieved through workshops, interviews and two online questionnaires. Although the data gathered from these activities has the limitation of reflecting only a partial view on priorities for digitisation - the view expressed by those institutions who volunteered to take part in the study - DiSCmap was able to develop:- a 'long list' of 945 collections nominated for digitisation both by intermediaries andend-users from 70 HE institutions (see p. 21);- a framework of user-driven prioritisation criteria which could be used to inform current and future digitisation priorities; (see p. 45)- a set of 'short lists' of collections which exemplify the application of user-driven criteria from the prioritisation framework to the long list (see Appendix X):o Collections nominated more than once by various groups of users.o Collections related to a specific policy framework, eg HEFCE's strategically important and vulnerable subjects for Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics.o Collections on specific thematic clusters.o Collections with highest number of reasons for digitisation

The DiSCmap project : overview and first results

Traditionally, digitisation of cultural and scientific heritage material for use by the scholarly community has been led by supply rather than demand. The DiSCmap project commissioned by JISC in 2008, aimed to study what refocussing of digitisation efforts will suit best the users of digitised materials, especially in the context of the research and teaching in the higher education institutions in the UK. The paper presents some of its initial outcomes based on quantitative and qualitative analysis of 945 special collections nominated for digitisation by intermediary users (librarians, archivist and museum curators), as well as end users' study involving a combination of online survey, focus groups and in-depth interviews. The criteria for prioritising digitisation advanced by intermediaries and end users were analysed and cross-mapped to a range of existing digitisation frameworks. A user-driven prioritisation framework which synthesises the findings of the project is presented

Academic attitudes to new media in UK higher education: an interdisciplinary study

This thesis examines the attitudes of UK academics toward new media as both cultural artefacts and tools, assessing the relationship of those attitudes to traditionally distinct disciplinary structures. An inclusive and conceptually informed framework was developed following a review of multi-disciplinary literatures addressing the organisation of disciplines, the management of Higher Education, and the multiple meanings of new media. The original contribution of the thesis is an enriched understanding of what new media mean to academics both symbolically and practically at a time of immense technological and organisational change. Empirical data were gathered from a sample of 209 UK academics in four academic fields which were selected strategically using a frame based on the work of Whitley (2000). The primary instrument used was a self-administered online questionnaire (distributed to 953 individuals in 112 in-scope institutions, hence the response rate is 22 percent) using Likert scales and semantic differentials to capture attitudinal statements. Illustrative, descriptive and inferential statistics were computed from this, although it must be noted that the population size could only be estimated. An analysis of commonalities and differences in emerging and conventional disciplinary structures suggests a stronger influence of the practical rather than symbolic influences of discipline on academics' attitudes toward new media. A homogenisation of attitudes is found across not only disciplines, but genders, age groups, and experience levels. At the same time, while these findings echo those of other research, strong conceptual and methodological differences remain evident in debates about new media in much scholarly literature, primarily that drawn along disciplinary lines, or for a specialist audience. This suggests two equally important positions from which academics assess new media; those rooted in disciplinary modes, and those common to multiple practitioners and audiences in the academic 'workspace'. This can be seen as symptomatic of the new managerial models for research, teaching and assessment currently prevalent within HE

U.S. medical resident familiarity with national tuberculosis guidelines

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The ability of medical residents training at U.S. urban medical centers to diagnose and manage tuberculosis cases has important public health implications. We assessed medical resident knowledge about tuberculosis diagnosis and early management based on American Thoracic Society guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A 20-question tuberculosis knowledge survey was administered to 131 medical residents during a single routinely scheduled teaching conference at four different urban medical centers in Baltimore and Philadelphia. Survey questions were divided into 5 different subject categories. Data was collected pertaining to institution, year of residency training, and self-reported number of patients managed for tuberculosis within the previous year. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to detect differences in median percent of questions answered correctly based on these variables.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The median percent of survey questions answered correctly for all participating residents was 55%. Medical resident knowledge about tuberculosis did not improve with increasing post-graduate year of training or greater number of patients managed for tuberculosis within the previous year. Common areas of knowledge deficiency included the diagnosis and management of latent tuberculosis infection (median percent correct, 40.7%), as well as the interpretation of negative acid-fast sputum smear samples.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Many medical residents lack adequate knowledge of recommended guidelines for the management of tuberculosis. Since experience during training influences future practice pattterns, education of medical residents on guidelines for detection and early management of tuberculosis may be important for future improvements in national tuberculosis control strategies.</p

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707