Faculty Bibliography

Meta-research is a bourgeoning field studying topics with significant relevance to health sciences librarianship, such as research reproducibility, peer review, and open access. As a discipline that studies research itself and the practices of researchers, meta-research spans disciplines and encompasses a broad spectrum of topics and methods. The breadth of meta-research presents a significant challenge for identifying published meta-research studies. Introducing a subject heading for meta-research in the controlled vocabularies of literature databases has the potential to increase the visibility of meta-research, further advance the field, and expand its impact on research practices. Given the relatively recent designation of meta-research as a field and its expanding use as a term, now is the time to develop appropriate indexing vocabulary. We seek to call attention to the value of meta-research for health sciences librarianship, describe the challenges of identifying meta-research literature with currently available key terms, and highlight the need to establish controlled vocabulary specific to meta-research.

INTRODUCTION:the healthcare sector is nascent. CCLMs implemented for the general adult population are not necessarily accessible to older adults. Given the recency of the CCLM literature and the seeming rarity of CCLM interventions designed for older adults, it is appropriate to employ scoping review methodology in order to generate a comprehensive review of the available information on this topic. This protocol will inform a scoping review that reviews characteristics of community-based programmes that link older adults with the healthcare sector. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The present protocol was developed as per JBI Evidence Synthesis best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols. The proposed scoping review will follow Levac and colleagues' update to Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology. Healthcare access at the system and individual levels will be operationalised in data extraction and analysis in accordance with Levesque and colleagues' Conceptual Framework of Access to Health. The protocol complies with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Beginning in August 2023 or later, citation databases (AgeLine (Ebsco); CINAHL Complete; MEDLINE (PubMed); Scopus Advanced (Elsevier); Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest); Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate)) and grey literature (Google; American Public Health Association Annual Meeting Conference Proceedings; SIREN Evidence & Resource Library) will be searched. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The authors plan to disseminate their findings in conference proceedings and publication in a peer-reviewed journal and deposit extracted data in the Figshare depository. The study does not require Institutional Review Board approval. REGISTRATION DETAILS:Protocol registered in Open Science Framework (DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2EF9D).

TOPIC/OBJECTIVE:Understanding approaches to sustainability in cataract surgery and their risks and benefits CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In the United States, healthcare is responsible for approximately 8.5% of greenhouse gas (GHG), and cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures. Ophthalmologists can contribute to reducing GHG emissions, which lead to a steadily increasing list of health concerns ranging from trauma to food instability. METHODS:We conducted a literature review to identify the benefits and risks of sustainability interventions. We then organized these interventions into a decision tree for use by individual surgeons. RESULTS:Identified sustainability interventions fall into the domains of advocacy and education, pharmaceuticals, process, and supplies and waste. Existing literature shows certain interventions may be safe, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly. These include dispensing medications home to patients after surgery, multi-dosing appropriate medications, training staff to properly sort medical waste, reducing the number of supplies used during surgery, and implementing immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery where clinically appropriate. The literature was lacking on the benefits or risks for some interventions, such as switching specific single use supplies to reusables or implementing a hub-and-spoke style theatre setup. Many of the advocacy and education interventions have inadequate literature specific to ophthalmology but are likely to have minimal risks. CONCLUSIONS:Ophthalmologists can engage in a variety of safe and effective approaches to reduce or eliminate dangerous GHG emissions associated with cataract surgery.

The paradigm of evidence-based medicine has become a fundamental part of health care and health professions education since the 1990s, even as it has drawn criticism. Meanwhile, in the past decade, increased data collection and computational power have brought about advances in machine learning, such as diagnostic algorithms for pattern recognition in medical images. Machine learning has potential to address some of the limitations of evidence-based medicine, but also presents new questions about what counts as evidence in medicine. Critical appraisal of machine learning can become part of the teaching of evidence-based medicine.

Spaced repetition study tools aim to optimize study time and maximize learning retention. An alternative to cramming (and then forgetting) information, spaced repetition reinforces learning by revisiting information over time in optimal intervals. Study tools utilizing spaced repetition algorithms have become widely used among students in many health professions, often forming a parallel curriculum to the official curriculum of textbooks and lectures. Examples of these tools include the open-source flashcard program Anki and the subscription-based visual learning platforms Osmosis and Picmonic. Health professions educators, including health science librarians, can learn from learners how they use spaced repetition study tools and thus potentially adjust teaching strategies and library collections.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:We hosted a national consensus conference with a diverse group of stakeholders to develop a patient-centered research agenda focused on reducing disparities in telehealth use. METHODS/UNASSIGNED: = 8). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 8). The top question identified by both groups focused on patient and family perspectives on important barriers to telehealth use. The entire group voting identified telehealth's impact on patient outcomes as the next most important questions, while the patient-only group identified trust-related considerations and cultural factors impacting telehealth use as next priorities. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This project involved extensive patient and stakeholder engagement. While voting varied between patients only and the entire group of conference attendees, top identified priorities included patient and family perspectives on important barriers to telehealth, trust and cultural barriers and facilitators to telehealth, and assessment of telehealth's impact on patient outcomes. This research agenda can inform design of future research focused on addressing disparities in telehealth use.

INTRODUCTION:Glycaemic variability and other metrics are not well characterised in subjects without diabetes. More comprehensive sampling as obtained with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may improve diagnostic accuracy of the transition from health to pre-diabetes. Our goal is to investigate the glycaemic system as it shifts from health to pre-disease in adult patients without diabetes using CGM metrics. New insights may offer therapeutic promise for reversing dysglycaemia more successfully with dietary, nutritional and lifestyle change before progression occurs to pre-diabetes and diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This systematic review will include comprehensive searches of the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, with restrictions set to studies published in the last 10 years in English and planned search date 10 March 2022. Reference lists of studies that meet eligibility criteria in the screening process will subsequently be screened for the potential inclusion of additional studies. We will include studies that examine CGM use and report diagnostic criteria such as fasting glucose and/or haemoglobin A1c such that we can assess correlation between CGM metrics and established diagnostic criteria and describe how CGM metrics are altered in the transition from health to pre-diabetes. The screening and data extraction will be conducted by two independent reviewers using Covidence. All included papers will also be evaluated for quality and publication bias using Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tools. If there are two or more studies with quantitative estimates that can be combined, we will conduct a meta-analysis after assessing heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The systematic review methodology does not require formal ethical review due to the nature of the study design. Study findings will be publicly available and published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42022308222.

The flood of publications during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the challenge of information overload. The pandemic heightened the need for technologies that can assist researchers in keeping up with the literature. Approaches to organizing the COVID-19 literature included curation of specialized databases, aggregation of articles into a repository of machine-readable data, and application of text mining to the literature search process. Technologies developed for keeping up with the COVID-19 literature may have potential for improving in general the ability of researchers to keep up with the literature.

It can take a year or more to complete a high-quality systematic review. Automation tools have the potential to expedite the systematic review process, but could compromise review quality if not adequately evaluated. International collaborations have begun to address the need to evaluate, improve, and integrate systematic review automation tools. The librarian role in systematic reviews may shift from expert searcher to systematic review automation expert.