Monday, June 28, 2010

Spring Clean for Library Catalogue - update

UPDATE (30th June 2010): thank you for your patience - the catalogue is back, better than ever, but looking pretty much exactly the same!

NHS Evidence Update: Health needs of people with Learning Disabilities

Health needs of people with Learning Disabilities 
from the NHS Evidence - learning disabilities specialist collection 

People with learning disabilities have a higher level of health needs than the general population, many of which are unmet. The Health Needs Annual Evidence Update 2010 will provide bibliographies of published research for the following key health issues:
  • Cancer
  • Challenging behaviour
  • Coronary heart disease
  • Epilepsy
  • Respiratory illness.
Searches for new evidence have been conducted across a range of databases and supplementary hand searching has been conducted by John Northfield, the Project Lead. All citations found in the searches have been sifted by the Project Lead to identify those most relevant to the subject scope of the Annual Evidence Update. There has also been input from professional referees, who are experts in their fields, to review the findings prior to publication. John Northfield has also compiled the summaries for the update.

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Falls Awareness Week

21st - 25th June, 2010
  • Falls among elderly people cost the NHS more than £4.6 million a day, new analysis found.
  • Up to one in three (3.4 million) people over 65 fall each year in the UK, existing figures show.
  • Almost half of all falls are among the over-80s, half of whom fall again in the following year.
from BBC News Falls amongst the elderly cost the NHS millions daily

Perhaps this Map of Medicine Falls Pathway can help?
Or an overview of the best quality evidence from NHS Evidence , or this more focused perspective from the NHS Evidence Specialist Collection: Later Life
 Contact Isla at the Medical Library if you'd like support in getting the best from these and other information resources.

Medical Images from TRIP

A pictures is worth a thousand words....
so where to get the best images?

TRIP (Turning Research Into Practice) has got a database of over 113,000 images - and also pulls from Google images.
On the front page of results you'll see the "four top medical images for a given search term on the main results page. We then allow users to 'See more images' and as you'll see from the image below we automatically import Google images to enhance the selection"

In addition to the images, TRIP is also a great place to "skim the cream" since it quickly find answers to clinical questions using the best available evidence, using a clear.
And it's so easy to use! Give it a try today.

Monday, June 21, 2010

NHS Evidence Update: Oesophago-gastric cancers

This is the second Annual Evidence Update on oesophago-gastric cancers prepared jointly by NHS Evidence - cancer and NHS Evidence - gastroenterology and liver diseases.
It includes an editorial by Dr Jamshed Bamanji (MBBS, PhD, FRCR, FRCP, Head of the Department, Institute of Nuclear Medicine, T5, University College Hospital)
The update of the Annual Evidence Update on oesophago-gastric cancers provides an opportunity to present an up-to-date comprehensive collection of systematic reviews and guidance that have been published since June 2009 and have been subject to rigorous selection criteria. Information is organised by topic areas and links are provided within each topic to the relevant systematic reviews, guidelines and patient information.

The AEU includes:
  • Clinical commentary by Dr. Jamshed Bomanji on The role of FDG PET in Oesophago-Gastric Cancer
  • Clinical introduction by Dr Chris Alcock
  • Results of 2010 Annual Evidence Update on Oesophageal cancers
  • Results of 2010 Annual Evidence Update on Stomach cancer
  • Patient Information Resources for Oesophago-gastric cancers
  • Additional Resources for Oesophago-gastric cancers

Friday, June 18, 2010

Journal Citation Reports 2009 now available

Journal Citation Reports®(JCR®) offers a systematic, objective means to critically evaluate the world's leading journals, with quantifiable, statistical information based on citation data. By compiling articles' cited references, JCR helps to measure research influence and impact at the journal and category levels, and shows the relationship between citing and cited journals.

Available at using University of Cambridge RAVEN login

Monday, June 14, 2010

NHS Evidence Update: Macular Degeneration; Homeopathy

Age Related Macular Degeneration
 from NHS Evidence - eyes and vision

Age Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) is one of the commonest causes of certifiable visual impairment in the UK. The 2010 Evidence Update focuses on the management of neovascular (wet) AMD and highlights the:
  • key evidence base underpinning current interventions (key randomised controlled trials and current guidance);
  • new evidence that is likely to inform a change in clinical practice;
  • emerging evidence for Lucentis, Avastin and combination treatments from key RCTs that have recently reported at scientific conferences but not yet published in peer reviewed literature;
  • current uncertainties in the effectiveness of treatments.

 Commentaries have been provided by Robin Hamilton, Consultant Ophthalmic Surgeon and Praveen Patel, Consultant Ophthalmologist, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and by Angela Reidy and Darwin Minassian, EpiVision.

from NHS Evidence - complementary and alternative medicine

The NHS Evidence - complementary and alternative medicine specialist collection will present an Annual Evidence Update (AEU) on Homeopathy from 14 June. This update will provide a summary of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, RCTs and other relevant studies published in the twelve months since the 2009 AEU on Homeopathy.

Friday, June 11, 2010

A review by another other name......

Review articles are useful pieces of work, which are often percieved as being relatively straightforward to do - desk based research, not requiring ethical approval, etc.

But what is a review?

According to a paper out today, it could be any one of 14 different things.

Health Info Libr J. 2009 Jun;26(2):91-108.

A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies.
Grant MJ, Booth A.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The expansion of evidence-based practice across sectors has lead to an increasing variety of review types. However, the diversity of terminology used means that the full potential of these review types may be lost amongst a confusion of indistinct and misapplied terms. The objective of this study is to provide descriptive insight into the most common types of reviews, with illustrative examples from health and health information domains.
METHODS: Following scoping searches, an examination was made of the vocabulary associated with the literature of review and synthesis (literary warrant). A simple analytical framework -- Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis and Analysis (SALSA) -- was used to examine the main review types.
RESULTS: Fourteen review types and associated methodologies were analysed against the SALSA framework, illustrating the inputs and processes of each review type. A description of the key characteristics is given, together with perceived strengths and weaknesses. A limited number of review types are currently utilized within the health information domain.
CONCLUSIONS: Few review types possess prescribed and explicit methodologies and many fall short of being mutually exclusive. Notwithstanding such limitations, this typology provides a valuable reference point for those commissioning, conducting, supporting or interpreting reviews, both within health information and the wider health care domain.

PubMed ID  : 19490148

(paper available in full-text on University computers, or using University RAVEN login)

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

NHS Evidence Update: Drug Misuse; Neurological Conditions

Drug Misuse
From NHS Evidence - National Library for Public Health

This evidence update covers drugs misuse treatment in offender populations with a special focus on female offenders. It is an update of the evidence from March 2009 through April 2010.
Neurological Conditions
From NHS Evidence - Neurological Conditions

This bulletin aims to update you on:
  • Interesting items recently added to the collection
  • The latest journal articles as highlighted by our Clinical Lead and Topic Advisors
  • Upcoming events of interest
  • What the project team are currently doing

Monday, June 07, 2010

NHS Evidence Update: Atrial Fibrillation

This update for health professionals and patients will present significant advances in knowledge about atrial fibrillation since our last update in June 2009. Topics will include medication, cardioversion, prevention of stroke, catheter ablation therapy and surgical treatment. This year we've also identified new systematic reviews on genetics and atrial fibrillation. As usual expert summaries with be included on this and the other topics identified to help make sense of the new evidence presented.

Friday, June 04, 2010

Mandatory surveillance weekly reports

"Beginning this week, the Department of Health will be publishing weekly hospital data on MRSA bloodstream infections and C.Difficile between March and May 2010. Previously, data was only published monthly and by NHS trust. From early July, infection figures for every NHS hospital in England will be updated on weekly, giving statistics for each of the previous 12 weeks. This document provides guidance on the collection of data for this new initiative. (Health Protection Agency - publications)"

From NHS Evidence - Health Management current awareness bulletin. Permalink

Tuesday, June 01, 2010

Feedback from last year's LibQUAL+ survey of Medical Library users

Most readers will recall that in November-December 2009 we ran an online survey, LibQUAL+, asking you what you thought of us. Two other branches of the University Library - the Central Science Library and the Moore Library - ran their own LibQUAL+ surveys at the same time.

First of all, we are very grateful to the more than three hundred readers who took the time and trouble to complete the Medical Library survey, and in many cases to record additional comments.

Since the end of the survey we have been busy analysing the results (which are processed for us by the US-based organisation that manages LibQUAL+ as a management tool for libraries worldwide) and deciding how best to address the issues raised. This report summarises the picture that has emerged, with our responses and the actions that we plan to take or have already taken.

General observations

In overall terms users seem to be reasonably happy with what we provide. The survey included three top-level "satisfaction" questions and asked respondents to give us a rating out of 9 (1=bad, 9=good). Our scores were as follows, compared with the average 2009 score for all UK academic libraries.
  • "In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library":
    Med Lib = 7.78 (UK average = 7.22) 
  • "In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or teaching needs":
    Med Lib = 7.31 (UK average = 6.74)
  • "How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library?":
    Med Lib = 7.45 (UK average = 6.96)
Analysis of detailed survey data

The survey questions were structured to reflect three broad areas of interest, covering (a) the way library staff deal with readers, (b) the resources we provide, and (c) the library as a place.

It was clear from the results that there was a consistently high level of satisfaction with the way library staff deal with readers, while the library as a place attracted a more neutral rating. By comparison, the resources we provide came in for heavier criticism, especially with regard to inadequate provision of electronic journals.

The personal information provided by each respondent allowed us to analyse these answers in more detail by user groups (student, allied health, medical staff, etc.). This exposed some significant differences in the way we are regarded by the various user categories, with non-clinical staff emerging as our most satisfied clients and allied health staff as our least satisfied.

The structured survey results were complemented by the free-text comments. We were impressed by the generally thoughtful and constructive contributions made by respondents here, and many of the comments helped to amplify the data gathered from the structured survey (though some comments also appeared to contradict the data analysis!). Putting the results of the survey and the comments together, we have been able to identify a list of issues that require a response from us. In some cases we are able to act immediately, in others the problem raises matters of policy or other broader issues that we need to take up with other bodies; and in yet other cases the responses indicate a misunderstanding of what is on offer, and thus a need for us to explain more clearly what we do and why.

A more detailed list of the issues that emerged, together with our responses, may be found here.

Arcadia Seminar: Death 2.0: What Becomes of Digital Assets after Death?

Part of the series of Arcadia seminars

Professor Lilian Edwards, Department of Law, University of Sheffield

Tuesday 01 June 2010, 18:00-19:15

Wolfson College, Old Combination Room (OCR).

Please email your intent to attend to Michelle Heydon at


Death seems to be discussed in web 2.0 circles only when it is tragic (eg internet suicide clusters) or in some other newsworthy (eg the Lori Drew online harassment case ). Yet if Facebook alone claim some 400 million subscribers, then it stands to reason that some of them will be reaching their final end as I write in quite ordinary ways. Yet the law is vague in the extreme (and varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction) on who would “own” a user’s Facebook profile in that sad event; and more significantly, what rights either the deceased or the heirs might have against Facebook to demand that the profile be deleted, maintained as a going concern, exported or preserved(“memorialised”). Nor is this problem confined to Facebook. Digital assets will be increasingly important as items in succession – and as cultural heritage – as the web 2.0 generation ages; and might include not only profiles on social networking sites, but also reputations and identities on money-making sites like eBay, photos on sites like Flickr and even user preferences on sites like Yet so far little or no attention has been paid to the legal nature and transmission of digital assets, except within the limited (if glamorous) domain of virtual property in virtual worlds and MMORP Gs. Neither are all digital assets likely to fall into categories of recognisable intellectual property (IP) protection. This paper seeks to investigate this domain, having regard to the interests of user, relatives, platform and especially, the public interest in preservation of online cultural heritage.

About the speaker

Professor Edwards’s principal research interests are in the law relating to the Internet, the Web and new technologies, with a European and comparative focus. She has co-edited three bestselling collections on Law and the Internet (Hart Publishing, 1997, 2000 and 2009) with Charlotte Waelde, and a third collection of essays—The New Legal Framework for E-Commerce—in Europe was published in 2005. Her work in on-line consumer privacy won the Barbara Wellbery Memorial Prize in 2004 for the best solution to the problem of privacy and transglobal data flows. She worked at Strathclyde University from 1986-1988 and Edinburgh University from 1989 to 2006 before moving to become Chair of Internet Law at Southampton from 2006-2008. She is Associate Director, and was co-founder, of the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) Centre for IP and Technology Law, funded from 2002-2012. She has taught IT, e-commerce and Internet law at undergraduate and postgraduate level since 1996 and been involved with law and artificial intelligence (AI) since 1985. She has been a visiting scholar and invited lecturer to universities in the USA , Canada, Australia, Mexico, and Latin America and has undertaken consultancy for the the European Parliament, the European commission and McAfee.

Please email your intent to attend to Michelle Heydon at

NHS Evidence Update: Menorrhagia

"NHS Evidence - women's health is holding its next Annual Evidence Update from Tuesday 1 June. The update aims to provide clinicians with the most up-to-date knowledge on the diagnosis and management of heavy menstrual bleeding.

We know that it is very difficult for busy clinicians to keep up-to-date with the huge volume of literature that is published each year and so the women's health specialist collection does this for you so that you don't have to!"