Thanks to everyone who took part in last night’s chat on open access. The transcript and analytics are now available, thanks to Symplur.
We may only have scratched the surface of a complicated subject, but there were some potentially useful actions: CILIP’s Health Libraries Group undertook to review their position on open access to Health Information and Libraries Journal, EAHIL offered their expertise, whose journal has been open access for some time and recently moved to a new platform, and several of us now have Open Access Week in our diaries.
We takle a break in August, but will be back in September, for what the French call la rentrée. Enjoy the summer.
For July’s chat we’ll be talking about open access, both generally, and as it applies to our own professional literature. Join us online for a chat led by Tom Roper
Open access has been with us for a long time. The Budapest Intiative, the Bethesda statement and the Berlin declaration statements are fifteen or more years old. Yet much of the biomedical literature remains behind paywalls, inaccessible to those who use it and even to those who created it.
As for our own professional literature, while the Journal of the Medical Library Association, The Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association / Journal de l’Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada, and the Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries are all fully open access, our own professional journal, Health Information and Libraries Journal, has yet to support open access fully. The publishers, Wiley, permit self-archiving of pre-print versions, while accepted (peer-reviewed) version may only be self-archived after a 24 month embargo period; authors may use Wiley’s OnlineOpen system, for a fee of $3,000.
The transcript and analytics of the June chat, on Health Information Week, are now available. Thanks to everyone who took part in an idea-packed chat, and in particular to the HIW2018 project group, part of the HEE/CILIP Leadership Development programme. The Health Information Week toolkit was mentioned a number of times. Find it on the Knowledge for Healthcare blog. Good luck to everyone organising activities in Health Information Week, which runs from 2nd to 8th July.
Health Information Week is a campaign to promote the use of good quality health resources that are readily available to patients and the public. The audiences for HIW are: patients and members of the public; partners who make HIW possible, such as libraries and voluntary organisations; and senior stakeholders who need to be aware of the activity. The HIW campaign aims to encourage partnership working across sectors and benefit all staff and the public by raising awareness of good quality health resources available to them.
As part of the HEE/CILIP Leadership Development programme our project group identified best practice and developed a toolkit from previous campaigns to help support HIW in 2018 and beyond.
Have you taken part in HIW in past years? Do you have plans for 2018 and beyond? This #ukmedlibs chat is your opportunity to share your experiences and learn from others.
The questions for this chat are:
- Have you ever taken part in HIW activities?
- Do you have plans for HIW2018?
- Are you aware of the HIW2018 toolkit?
- Have you used the toolkit to help plan your activities?
- What benefits have you found from participating in HIW?
- What difficulties have you encountered from participating in HIW?
- Who are your best partners?
- What has surprised you through participating in HIW?
- Do you evaluate HIW – how?
Last night’s #ukmedlibs chat on TEL (Technology Enhanced Learning) gave me (@samanthaclare) lots of food for thought. If you’d like to know what was said then take a look at the transcript and see what the analytics say about the chat.
Thanks to all those that contributed, watch out for details of the next chat which will cover Health Information Week at 8pm on Tuesday 19th June.
Technology-enhanced learning is increasingly a part of the health library’s activities. This might be anything from providing workstations for colleagues to complete elearning through to managing learning platforms and creating elearning content. Many of these activities align well with our existing services and skills. But what are the pros and cons? How does this impact on your service and your professional skill set? How can technology-enhanced learning support information literacy?
- What’s your current involvement with delivering or supporting technology-enhanced learning?
- What are the synergies between LKS and TEL?
- How can libraries support teachers and trainers to bring technology into their sessions in a meaningful way?
- What challenges do you anticipate (or experience) when turning face-to-face training into elearning?
- What TEL do you use to support information literacy and what additional resources would you like to see?
- Do you support your colleagues with their general digital literacy and what impact does this have on them and your service?
- What professional development and support do you need to help you deliver TEL?
Join us at 8pm on Tuesday 15th May for a hearty discussion.
Thank you very much to those stalwarts that turned up for the recent #ukmedlibs chat on statistics. Very special thanks must go to Louise Levitt (@louisewann) and Lauren Smith (@walkyouhome) as they contributed to the conversation whilst surrounded by the project team!! If anyone else was lurking we’d love to know why you didn’t join in? Did we not promote the session sufficiently, was it poor timing, was it a scary subject?
In any case, the transcript and analytics of the chat are now available on symplur.
Our next chat on 15th May (it sounds early but that’s the third Tuesday of the month!) will focus on technology enhanced learning – questions and topic yet to be decided.
As ever, we’d like to know what you want to talk about – do drop us a line either via email or on twitter – tell us what you like to chat about with colleagues.
Statistics! Yes, that dreaded word; and yet….they matter, they have the power to prove and disprove certain elements of our work. To provide the evidence we need around resources, funding, and activities. They provide a snapshot of your services at a particular point in time.
But, do you feel that you know what to collect or what to do with the data once collected? Do you find statistics valuable or a waste of time? Do you have an example of how statistics have made the case for you and changed things?
This #ukmedlibs chat is your opportunity to contribute to the work of the statistics project group that was formed as part of this year’s HEE/CILIP leadership course.
The questions for this chat are:
- Do you know what statistics are collected on a national basis?
- What do you think about the national statistics returns and the data collected?
- What local statistics that aren’t included in the national statistics return do you collect?
- How do you use your locally collected statistics?
- Think back to a time when you have used statistics in an impactful way. What did you do and how did it work out?
- What changes would you like to see made to the national statistics process to support you and your library service in the future?
- What resources or skills would further enable you to collect local statistics?
- Have we missed anything important?
- Of everything we’ve discussed, what is the most important aspect to you?
Come and chat with us at 8pm on Tuesday 17th March. (one caveat – this chat is likely to have more relevance to NHS library managers, but do offer your opinion as all are welcome!)
The transcript and analytics of our March journal club chat, a discussion of Chu F, Ball A Using Quality Improvement Tools to Redefine a Clinical Librarianship Program: A Case Study J Hosp Libr 2018 1-7 https://doi.org/10.1080/15323269.2018.1400826. Thanks to everyone who participated. Next month’s chat, on library statistics and how to make the best use of them, takes place on Tuesday 17th April at 8 pm.
We haven’t run a Twitter journal club for a while, so for the March chat, at 8 pm on Tuesday 20th March we’ll have a discussion about this paper:
Chu F, Ball A
Using Quality Improvement Tools to Redefine a Clinical Librarianship Program: A Case Study
J Hosp Libr 2018 1-7 https://doi.org/10.1080/15323269.2018.1400826
It’s not open access, but if you ask your document supply colleagues nicely, they should be able to find you a copy.
UPDATE: with thanks to Nikki Dettmar of the #medlibs chats, there’s a copy in the University of Washington’s repository: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/41616