A Place in the Sun: Cleaning up Online Content with the LibGuides Summer Project

ECU Libraries have attempted to address issues with out-of-date content in LibGuides by conducting an annual group cleanup project during the lull over the summer. Librarians are provided with a brief weekly instruction session on a feature of LibGuides or a best practice in web design. They are then given one week to make the change to their guides

Information Literacy Concepts

Content includes: What is Information Literacy? How Libraries Work; What’s Credible Anymore? Fake News and evaluating the information you encounter during your research; The Information Landscape: an Overview of information types and when they appear in publication; Navigating the Information Landscape: Search Engines, Library Databases, Library of Congress; Classification, and Discovery Tools; The Research Process: Settling on a topic, identifying keywords, and retrieving the information you need; The Ethical Use of Information: About academic integrity, avoiding plagiarism, and scholarship as a conversation.Overview: Purpose and goals This open educational resource provides learners with an overview of major information literacy concepts identified in the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy. Information literacy skills are tied to student success according to library literature, and improving the information literacy skills of students at East Carolina University and elsewhere contributes to retention and their ability to navigate real-world information needs. Intended Learners Intended learners for this reading include students in their final year of high school as well as those in the first year or two of college. Specifically, these are learners encountering college-level research assignments for the first time. They are likely unfamiliar with many basic research concepts, such as databases and Boolean operators, but will be shortly expected to conduct research and locate high-quality sources for their research-based assignments.East Carolina University, Joyner Librar

Connect with your Users: Usability Testing and How User Experience May Actually Work for You

For a library, User Experience (UX) refers to studying the emotions and attitudes of its users regarding the library building, website, or services. This can be executed through usability testing, which allows you to truly learn how users experience the library in all its forms. In this poster, a library system conducted a pilot project, a usability test, to research optimal staffing configurations with the goal of developing a sustainable UX strategy. A task force identified and tested a webpage common to both libraries in the two-library system - the Database List. Faculty and student users were tested and recorded as they completed various tasks using the original Database List and then subsequent redesigned versions. As a result of the study, the Database List was redesigned, personas - fictional characters of users created from actual user data- were developed, and the task force submitted recommendations for the best staffing model for sustainable UX. The presenters will outline the methods and tools used for the usability study, with the benefits and drawbacks of the different staffing models, and exhibit the findings of the project. This poster is a must-see for anyone who is interested in the best way to implement UX in their library

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in the Academic Library: A Methodology for Mapping Multiple Means of Representation in Library Tutorials

Librarians designed a biology tutorial not only to address an assignment, but also to make tutorials more accessible to students with various learning styles. The Science Librarian created the content by using aspects of the Information Literacy Standards for Science and Technology/Engineering, an informal survey of biology faculty, and assignments for the biology labs. The Instructional Design Librarian created multiple modules that engaged users through text, images, audio, and interactive tutorials. The researchers used Universal Design for Learning principles to address multiple learning styles, specifically multiple means of representation and created a mapping technique for those principles that can be applied to any library tutorial. To assess the effectiveness, students with learning disabilities completed a usability test on the tutorial

Establishing a Scholarly Communication Baseline Using Liaison Competencies to Design Scholarly Communication Boot Camp Training Sessions

At East Carolina University (ECU), the Scholarly Communication Librarian and the Head of Collection Development have been conducting Scholarly Communication Boot Camps for liaison librarians since 2015. These boot camps have covered topics like open educational resources, copyright, author’s rights, data management, and more. ECU’s liaisons are spread across many different departments, and the boot camp allows for continuity of concepts and best practices among librarians with varied primary duties. Recently, the Head of Research and Instructional Services and the Head of Collection Development reworked the library’s liaison competencies. The revised document delineates concepts and best practices in a format that is not unlike that of formal learning objectives. The new competencies will be used for writing job descriptions for hiring committees, goal setting, training new hires, and more. As a result of this work, we have built new boot camp sessions around these revised competencies. Please join us as we discuss the evolution of liaison competencies at ECU and how they are incorporated into library trainings and every day liaison work

Universal Design for Learning, the Library, and STEM: Common Cause, Uncommon Ground

Access the Biology Information Literacy Tutorial at the following URL: http://libguides.ecu.edu/biol1101In summer 2012, the Science Librarian and Instructional Design Librarian at Joyner Library, East Carolina University, came together to design a series of interactive tutorials to assist with questions related to an assignment for entry-level, first year biology course. The students are required to find primary and secondary sources in scholarly Biology literature. The librarians applied Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles to create a tutorial hosted in LibGuides that engages students who learn visually and kinetically. The tutorial also assists reference staff who may be unfamiliar with research in the sciences and reduces the number of questions about the assignment at the reference desk. The poster will highlight the methods used in creating the tutorial, as well as best practices for information literacy tutorials in the STEM fields. The librarians are in the process of completing a usability test with students with learning disabilities to investigate the UDL principles and are gathering additional qualitative and quantitative data to investigate overall efficacy of the tutorial. The initial findings of this study, which is ongoing, will be shared at the poster session. The research conducted in this project contributes to the field of Librarianship by further investigating the use of UDL principles in online tutorials, of which there is little in the literature. The tutorial is freely available through LibGuides community site or via ECU directly, and the researchers will be on hand to provide hands-on demos, pass out links to the tutorial, as well as answer questions about the study.ACRL Science and Technology Section hosted this poster session

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial

Background Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. Methods RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. Findings Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61–69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1–10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688–1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4–82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6–83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial

Background Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. Methods RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00541047 . Findings Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60–69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0–10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612–0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6–75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2–81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. Funding Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570