Tuesday, January 29, 2008

A New Slant Pattern On Teaching Information Literacy

I honestly never thought I would be mentioning fantsy football in one of my blog posts. Afterall this blog's primary focus is on things of interest to medical librarians. While I am closet fantasy football addict and I find all of the research and games highly interesting, I doubted whether it had much relevance to medical librarianship.

However, I was pleasantly surprised when the Information Literacy Land of of Confusion blog mentioned the article Librarians' sport of choice: Teaching information literacy through fantasy football by Paul Waelchli in College & Research Libraries, January 2008 v.69 (1).

Fantasy sports, particularily fantasy football, are a booming hobby/obsession. People get together and "draft" real professional players onto their mock team. These people's mock teams then compete against other mock teams within a league. The mock team scores points based on the actual player's performance in the real game. According to Wikipedia, a 2003 survey found 15 million people played fantasy football and spend an average of $150 a year, making it a $1.5 billion industry. There is even a Fantasy Football Librarian.

There is a lot of research that goes into drafting and then starting your players. "Owners" must know if a player is injured, plays well on grass (or doesn't run well on grass), whether the opposing team's defense might thwart specific offensive players, and whether the game will be played indoors or outdoors (bad weather can kill a passing game and cause problems for a kicker). In many leagues there is a "buy in" to play and the winning team at the end of the season usually wins the pot of money.

Now why on earth would a librarian want to use fantasy football as method to teach information literacy? Well, it is something that most of your medical students and residents can relate to. If you doubt me, look at your computers from mid August to December. Most likely you will see somebody checking their fantasy football stats and checking injury reports, waiver wires, and start/sit suggestions sites. Librarians are always looking for good teaching examples which are relavent and easily understood by students. The same skills that people use to evaluate information on players are some of the same type of skills that can be used to identify academic information.


According to the article the University of Dubuque taught fantasy football research to incoming student athletes. "Through the lesson, students engaged in discussions of creditability, validity, timeliness, and search strategies to find and evaluate fantasy football information. The assessment of these instruction sessions showed incoming students successfully identifying evaluation criteria and reporting positive changes in how they viewed research and libraries." Skeptical? Paul also states, "the successful fantasy sport player consistently applies four of the five ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards (2000)."

Not into sports, let alone fantasy sports? Don't worry, the librarians who taught the classes had varying experience with fantasy football, including one who had no previous experience. The process was more about research than football, football was just the catalyst for learning. It appears that it was successful endeavor, 80% of the students were able to describe two of three appropriate source evaluation criteria. More than 60% were able to describe all three.

Not only did students learn but it also helped change their perception of the library and research. Prior to taking the class students described what research meant to them as, "headaches," "work I didn't want to do," and "school work." After the taking the class students responded to the same question with phrases like, "making sure one is getting accurate information," "comparing and knowing where I'm getting my information," and "fun work."

So have I peaked your interest? If so, the article also includes the lesson plan the librarians used. Perhaps you can tweak the lesson plan a little bit to teach information literacy to your medical students and residents.

Monday, January 28, 2008

Free Technology Seminar and Free Copyright Seminar

There are two upcoming free seminars from SirsiDynix that medical librarians might be interested in. The seminars are free but because space is limited you must register.

Twenty Five Technologies to Watch and How -Stephen Abram
Jan 31, 2008 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Eastern
Can our libraries be more open? Can we be more open to our users, our communities, to new technologies? Can we be more open to change? How?
More Info from SirsiDynix Register for Free Now

The 21st Century Classroom: Copyright and Electronic Content -Dru Zuretti
Feb 19, 2008 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Eastern
Discusses the complex issues surrounding the use of electronic content on campus and where copyright comes into play.
More Info from SirsiDynix Register for Free Now

OvidSP Switch Coming Soon

The date is fast approaching where Ovid users will be required to use OvidSP. I wanted remind librarians using Ovid to contact their customer support person to ensure they have OvidSP defaults set up the way your library likes them. Your Ovid support rep. should be able to email you a PDF document listing the various "changeable" items.

Important Note:
Ovid's URL will change! The new URL will be http://ovidsp.ovid.com. People using the old address will be redirected to the correct address. But I am not sure for how long so it would probably be a good idea to start changing your links within your OPAC, web pages, etc. after you switch.
You should also make sure other things like your link resolver, Athens, proxy server, PubMed LinkOut, etc. have or will be changing the link as well.

Friday, January 25, 2008

MLA 2008 Registration

Registration is open for MLA 2008 in Chicago. Be sure to register by April 11, 2008, to receive the early-bird discount and save $60!

For more information go to:
MLA 2008 webpage: http://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/
MLA 2008 blog: http://npc.mlanet.org/mla08/

Use the online planner to look through the schedule and form a plan of attack to attend all of those interesting programs. http://www.mlanet.org/am/am2008/events/builder.html

On a very slightly related note:
If you are a baseball fan and you are going to MLA, you will be happy to know that you have two options.

The Cubs are playing the Pittsburgh Pirates May 16-18 and tickets are available at the Official Site of the Chicago Cubs.

The White Sox are playing the Cleveland Indians May 20-22 and tickets are available at the Official Site of the Chicago White Sox.

Since my beloved St. Louis Cardinals won't be playing the Cubs during MLA, I might have to get tickets for my adopted team the Cleveland Indians.

Confidence in Health Searches: Poor Indicator of Good Information

Josh Seidman from The Patient Centered Health Information Technology blog alerted me to the study "Impact of Web Searching and Social Feedback on Consumer Decision Making: A Prospective Online Experiment" published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) 2008 Jan. 22; v. 10 (1) e2. which revealed two interesting findings.

The study revealed that searching high-quality online resources improves consumers’ health knowledge, but a consumers’ degree of "confidence" in their answers is not a good indicator of whether their answers are correct.

By now most librarians are saying, "Well Duh...We know that." But what is interesting is that Josh believes we need a "more rigorous strategy for guiding consumers to high-quality health content," because MLA's and other reputable health organizations' guidelines to consumers have done little to actually guide consumers to accurate health information.

Wow. I don't know what to say about that, perhaps there are some consumer health librarians who might be able to comment.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

What Do You Call A Medical Library

Ves Dimov at Clinical Cases and Images asks, "What Do You Call a 'Medical Library' in 2008? "Information Commons." This topic seems to float through every so often on the email lists (MEDLIB & HLS) and librarians definitely have given their opinions on the renaming the library.


Ves posts the question in response to John D. Halamka who wrote, "In my CIO role at Beth Israel Deaconess, I oversee the medical libraries. In the past, Libraries were 'clean, well lighted places for books'. With the advent of Web 2.0 collaboration tools, blogging, content management portals, lulu.com on demand publishing, and digital journals, it is clear that libraries of paper books are becoming less relevant. The end result is that the Medical Library has been renamed the Information Commons and the Department of Medical Libraries has been retitled the Department of Knowledge Services. Librarians are now called Information Specialists."


As the chatter on the email lists indicates, these thoughts are not new. What is the big deal if the CIO wants to change the name of the library to Information Commons and librarians are known as Information Specialists? John thinks the change in the library's "content" from books to online resources necessitates a name change. With the advent of Google Books and other similar endeavors and online resources, Ves seems to wonder if this is the way of the future.


According to Wikipedia the definition of a library is "collection of information, sources, resources, and services: it is organized for use and maintained by a public body, an institution, or a private individual. In the more traditional sense, a library is a collection of books." The phrase "Information Commons' refers to our shared knowledge-base and the processes that facilitate or hinder its use. It also refers to a physical space, usually in an academic library, where any and all can participate in the processes of information research, gathering and production." (Incidently the term Information Commons was not in Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster Online, or Cambridge Dictionaries Online , but library was.)

So why bother changing the name from Library to Information Commons when they appear to be very similar? In many cases the reason appears to be because people believe the term library brings to mind books and printed material, essentially the library of old. However, if we are to change the name of a department based on the change in technology shouldn't we name the Radiology department (which brings to mind old x-ray film) Online Medical Image Processing or Computer Medical Image Processing? We have already renamed Medical Records to Health Data Management, but people still call and look for Medical Records and are frustrated when the internal phone book doesn't list a Medical Records Department. They end up spending more time searching for what Medical Records was renamed just to get a simple phone number than if the original name was kept.

Personally I prefer the term Library and I think more people understand what a library is rather than an Information Commons. I think the term Information Commons is a concept still too vague for most. It would be interesting to see how many Medical Libraries have changed their name to Information Commons but are still referred to (unofficially) as the library. If most people are still calling it the library, then what was the point of the change.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Life as a Healthcare CIO

Have you ever wondered why your hospital library is forced to buy a certain type of desktop, unable to load various software programs that would make library applications work more efficiently? Take a look at this recent post from Life as a Healthcare CIO, by John D. Halamka where he talks about the differences in supporting the hospital's IT needs vs. the university's IT needs. In hospitals, a lot of the decisions are made because of HIPPA and money.

I understand the need to have like systems, platforms and software. I understand the need for efficiency. Unfortunately as many librarians report, this one size fits all approach does not always work effectively. Some of these policies prevent clinicians, librarians, nurses, etc. from doing their jobs. Take for example the policy that employees are not allowed to load programs onto their desktop computers. Good in theory but when certain programs (like the latest version of Flash or Java) are necessary for the performance of your department dependent applications, it becomes frustrating when you are unable to load it and must wait for a decision from the IT department as to whether they will be allowed to install it on your computer. Or take for example the doctor who wants to look up the latest article on a certain procedure that was just published. He logs onto the clinical workstation on the floor but soon discovers he is prohibited from going out to the Internet to get the article due to security reasons.

I feel hospital IT departments lack an adequate method to proactively address these situations where the round peg does not fit into the square hole. Libraries are not the only departments that have certain software and hardware needs that may be slightly different from the hospital norm. For example great strides in imaging and storage capacity has made the radiology department's software and hardware needs different from the hospital. Perhaps libraries are the smallest, quietest, and "least profitable" of the departments in the minds of IT and management to qualify to be handled as a unique case. If that’s so then we need to do a better job of education.

Yet all of the education in the world will not help if the IT department strictly adheres to its dogma and continues to force the round pegs into the square holes. If that is the case, the IT guy will not only be thought of the guy that says no, but also as a barrier to the operation of your department.

Collaborative Technologies and Science: More Tools or More Risk?

Social networking has begun to make inroads in the scientific community. The Scientific American recent article, Science 2.0: Great New Tool, or Great Risk, discusses wikis, blogs, and other technologies and how their usage by researchers could be transforming how science is researched, published, disseminated, and viewed. Research work is beginning to become available through blogs, wikis, and social networks by a small but growing group of researchers.

In Eric Schell's post, Evidence of the Value of Blogs as Scholarship, he mentions a case where a postdoc geneticist received credit and acknowledgement for his blog entries. Reed Cartwright posted his random thoughts on a mutant plant gene on his blog in March 2005. One year later after reading the post Luca Comai, a plant geneticist, contacted Reed. He and said that he had coincidentally arrived at the same hypothesis, and was about to publish his research in Plant Cell. Comai said he felt obligated to acknowledge Mr. Cartwright’s blog post and offered to make him a co-author of his article. Mr. Cartwright, who is not a plant geneticist, accepted the offer.

Of course this method of information and knowledge sharing is not without controversy. While there are researchers praising the transparent and "open notebook" approach citing various success stories like OpenWetWare, UsefulChem, Chembarkothers, there are others worried about potential minefields. The fear of being scooped and the lack of attribution and credit can be huge barriers to overcome in a system where being the first to report a discovery, publishing peer reviewed journals and having heavily cited articles is the foundation for promotion within scientific community.

I like what Bora Zivkovic said in the Scientific American article, "It's a Darwinian process. About 99 percent of these ideas are going to die. But some will emerge and spread." I think that not only sums up the evolution of these tools in science but other disciplines as well such as medicine, education, and libraries.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Library of Congress Using Flickr

The Library of Congress published on Flickr approximately 3,000 photos from two of their most popular image collections, "American Memory: Color photographs from the Great Depression" and The George Grantham Bain Collection. Matt Raymond, director of communications, in his blog post "My Friend Flickr" writes, "If all goes according to the plan, the project will help address at least two major challenges: how to ensure better and better access to our collections and how to ensure that we have the best possible information about those collections for the benefit of researchers and posterity."

This project is just a drop in the bucket. The Library of Congress has approximately 14 million prints, photographs, and other visual materials. Many of the photos are missing key caption information and Matt states tagging and commenting on these images "will benefit not only the community but also the collections themselves."

The results are astounding. After only 24 hours there have been 392,000 views on Flickr's photostream and 50,000 views of photos. All of the 3,000+ photos have been viewed, 420 have comments, 1,200 have been favorited.

You must check out The Commons on Flickr where these images are available to be view, tagged, and commented on. Not only are the wonderful to look at but who knows you might recognize somebody or some place and be able to add a comment.

For those librarians who are also responsible for your hospital's archive collection, Flickr might be a good way to make the collection more available.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Online Tutorials and Handouts to OvidSP From Other Libraries

Dean Giustini lists what he believes are the top five pros and cons to OvidSP and also directs us to a tutorial on the new interface from Yale Medical Library.
Currently many libraries are just linking to Ovid's documentation and tutorials, but there are a few libraries who have already created their own documentation and tutorials. For those of you interested in what others are teaching, you might want to check out the following sites.

Online Tutorials:
OvidSP Tutorials – Cushing/Whitney Medical Library, Yale University
OvidSP –Medical College of Wisconsin Library
OvidSP –University of Michigan Taubman Medical Library
Using PICO to search the OvidSP CINAHL Nursing Database – North Colorado Medical Center Medical Library

Documentation / Handouts:
Multiple Search Modes in OvidSP for MEDLINE (and more): What to Expect – Himmelfarb Library
Natural Language Searching Medline (and more) on OvidSP – Himmelfarb Library
RSS Feeds on OvidSP –Himmelfarb Library
OVID databases starter workbook (pdf) –University of Leeds Library
OVID databases advanced workbook (pdf) –University of Leeds Library

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Using Wikis to Create a Faculty Author Database

Since 1993, the Cleveland Clinic Alumni Library (in conjunction with the Office of Professional Staff Affairs) has compiled and maintained a bibliographic database of publications authored by Staff and employees of the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. The librarian finds most of the information from MEDLINE, but she also uses many other databases as well information from the authors to populate the database. Currently the database is published online using RefShare.

Today while reading through my Bloglines feeds I ran across the article, Using Wiki Technology to Build a Faculty Publications Database (not free) by Elizabeth Connor in the Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries v4 (1) 2007.

What an interesting way to use wiki technology. Unfortunately the article is "Not Yet Published" and there isn't an abstract for me to even get a hint about the article. I am eager to see how this was done and if it is a viable method for us to use.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Survey of Health Sciences Librarian Blog Readers

Marcus Banks is working on a paper for a NCNMLG / MLGSCA meeting in Las Vegas next month, called, "Delving into the Health Sciences Biblioblogosphere: How Has it Changed our Professional Practice?"

He plans to include in his paper, the results of a survey of librarians who read blogs that are written by health sciences librarians and targeted to other professionals.

So if you if you read blogs by and for health sciences librarians, you might want to take 5-10 minutes to complete the survey. The survey is open until January 21

Delving into the Health Sciences Biblioblogosphere: How Has it Changed our Professional Practice?
Abstract:
What seemed strange a few years ago has now become mainstream. Today several health sciences librarians maintain prominent blogs as a way to exchange information about new resources and services; and to stimulate discussion and debate among colleagues. As a means of gauging the impact of this development, this paper will report the results of two surveys: one of a targeted sample of high-profile health sciences librarian bloggers; and another of the larger base of regular blog readers.

To some extent the blogs serve the same function as an old-fashioned email list like MEDLIB-L; for example, most blogs have a threaded comment function. But there are important differences. Blogs usually convey the "personality" of the author, link to other resources, and have a visual branding that is absent on email. Blogs remain a new (if no longer strange) phenomenon, and this paper is an attempt to understand their functions and potential.
The surveys will address these questions: How has maintaining a blog changed the professional interests of the authors? What functions do they hope to serve with their blog? Do readers attempt to incorporate what they learn into everyday practice? Or are the blogs mainly current awareness vehicles? Finally, to what extent has interaction with these blogs (either as an author or reader) displaced the use of email lists? Are the blogs a disruptive technology, or simply an additional means of communication in our field? This paper will provisionally answer these questions, with the hopes of stimulating additional inquiry.

Check Your Medline Filters

Mark Rabnett recently wrote about his experience trying to apply the Cochrane filter (as discussed in the International Journal of Epidemiology) to retrieve reports of controlled trials in PubMed. Not only did he discover an error in the filter's search strategy, but he also discovered that recent changes to publication types and subject descriptors made by the National Library of Medicine can cause your previously working filters to flounder.

Mark's post reminded that there are many of us who have our tried and true filters on PubMed or Ovid and that we need to check them at the beginning of the year to see if they still up to par.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Email Your Social Software IT Successes and Horror Stories

In an earlier post Mark Funk presented some findings from the survey done by the Task Force on Social Networking Software. The task force found that many librarians are having access to various social networking web sites and applications blocked by their IT departments.

Mark asked for some success stories on getting these sites unblocked, but didn't receive any. He is asking again for you to send not only success stories, but failure stories as well. The information will be used for an article he working on. He hopes to publish in a magazine that's read by organization leaders. In it, he wants to include examples or techniques that made the powers that be unblock sites. He would also like to include horror stories of necessary access that was denied, that will also help. Please share.

I know we all have the horror stories and there are probably some of us out there who have great success stories. So, send them to Mark, we can all benefit from reading about the good, the bad and the ugly of social applications and IT departments.

Remember please emails these to Mark. While I am interested in them, I am not writing the article, he is.

How To Use These Social Applications In Your Library

One of the biggest questions I hear is, "These social tools are all neat and fun to use personally, but what can I do with them in library?" Well look no further, there are two online classes this month that address this. Mark your calendars so you don't miss out.

Implement Social Bookmarking at the Reference Desk - February 19, 2008
Bookmarking for the Greater Good: Come learn how to adopt this Web 2.0 tool and how it can benefit your library during a one hour online class on Tuesday February 19, 2008 at 11 A.M. CT.

Go to http://nnlm.gov/mcr/news_blog/?p=641 to contact Rebecca Brown (NN/LM Technology Liaison) and sign up.

And back by popular demand....

Developing an RSS Journal Service for Your Library -January 23, 2008 11A.M. CT
A special Breezing Along with the RML session at 11 A.M. Central Time will be on Developing an RSS Journal Service for Your Library. For those of you who were unable to attend MCMLA 2007 or missed the session on Developing and Marketing an RSS Journal Service for Your Library, the NN/LM MidContinental Region has invited the Librarians from Ebling Library at the University of Wisconsin for an encore presentation of their Omaha session.

Here is the original write up from the MCMLA 2007 program:
More and more journals are making their tables of contents available via RSS feed; however, barriers still exist between the user and the content. A working group at University of Wisconsin academic health sciences library set out in Fall 2006 to “explore possibilities for developing an RSS current awareness service that would categorize health sciences RSS feeds and integrate them with SFX link resolver, document delivery, and RefWorks.” They developed a 4-phase plan, including overhauling the existing RSS journal feeds pages, developing bundled packages for quick subscription to several journals, developing a shopping cart-like application for users to easily create customized collections, and developing instructional and promotional plans for staff and patrons.

For more information go to http://nnlm.gov/mcr/news_blog/?p=640. A reminder will be sent out at a later date, along with the URL.

Both classes look good but I am especially interested in the Developing an RSS Journal Service. I was unable to attend and this subject is of interest to me. I particularly interested in the shopping cart like application for users to create customized collections. I think both classes should be an interesting.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Researchers Using Google Scholar Less

Dean Giustini has reported on a TechCrunch.com article that while Google's Google Web Search traffic increased by 20%, Google Scholar's traffic decreased by 32%.

According to Dean, Google has "squandered" away opportunities to make it more powerful tool. Scholar is not as useful and many web researchers are going back to regular Google for "indiscriminate scholarly trawling of the web."



He believes unless Google changes their ways, Scholar will eventually go the way of the dodo bird.

Monday, January 07, 2008

OvidSP Switch Fast Approaching

Believe it or not we are into the second week of January. The holidays have come and gone and now we need to turn our bleary eyes to what lays ahead. The switch from regular Ovid to OvidSP in February is right around the corner. If you haven't played with it, start now. I also recommend taking one of their OvidSP classes. OvidSP Basic Search is a totally different beast. Take everything you know about Medline and standard Ovid searching and throw it out the window.

First let me thank the people at Ovid, Julie Quain and Bob Morrisey for setting up a Medline OvidSP webinar for us to address the many issues and questions we had about OvidSP and OvidSP Basic Search. The session helped a lot of us to understand what the man behind the curtain was doing.

Here is what we learned about OvidSP:

The majority of the time, librarians will want to search Ovid Sytnax.

Don't let the name Basic Search fool you. While its name implies that it is the basic version of Ovid Syntax, that is biggest mistake you could make. Librarians (myself included) have been approaching Basic Search as if it is the simpler version of Ovid Syntax. Ovid Basic Search is so different from regular Ovid (or Ovid Sytnax) that it is almost a totally different Medline database.

Basic Search uses natural language processing. Yeah, yeah, we have heard that, big deal. Well the way you search it makes it a big deal! Every term typed into the search box is weighted according to specific algorithm that looks at the amount of times it is used within the Medline record (not the full text article). If you check the box "Search Related Terms," Basic Search is supposed to look for similar terms to your query. The natural language system does have a cut off of approximately 500. (For more information on the NLP 500 cut off click here to view a reprint of Ovid's explanation).

At our library we were concerned because we noticed the NLP was forgetting to include MeSH terms as part of the related terms. We discovered this with quite a few terms. Specifically, ragweed (ambrosia was not a related term), breast cancer (breast neoplasms was not a related term) and when you typed in breast neoplasms (breast cancer was not a related term). While one might make a pretty good case that ambrosia did not make the cut to be included in the 500 results, one would think the terms breast cancer and breast neoplasms are so interchangeable that they easily should have been included in the related terms before less popular terms like carcinoma breast. Because the backbone of MEDLINE (the records) is built around the MeSH vocabulary, this troubled us as librarians. We asked our trainer about the problem and she understood our concerns and told us she would find out about it. (When I find out, I will let you know.)

We thought there was a big problem with AND and OR. This was something that perplexed me. I had no idea why Basic Search handled AND and OR so poorly. I even used the AND and OR buttons at the bottom of the Search History box. The problem is that while in Basic Search, the system is trying to do Boolean searching while also trying to handle the algorithm and weighted concepts. The results are yucky. The bottom line…DO NOT use AND or OR while in Basic Search to combine searches. Only use it to combine results. What I mean is do not combine your breast cancer and tamoxifen search with your other search of breast neoplasms and tamoxifen. Go through both searches and select the articles you like. Once you have a set containing the articles you like, then you can combine those sets of selected articles so that you only have to print, email, or save one set.

They (the Ovid people) keep saying the best way to search is just to type the whole question/query into the search box. They are right. Stop trying to force Ovid Basic to perform like Ovid Syntax and you will be MUCH happier. I like to call them Magic 8 Ball searches. They work surprisingly well on OvidSP Basic.

Is OvidSP Basic the answer to comprehensive Medline searching? Heck no. But it is similar to and better than using Google for searching Medline, which is what a lot of people do (like it or not). OvidSP Basic also offers an alternative method of searching for librarians who want to make sure they aren't missing anything that may have slipped through the indexing cracks. As good as the indexers are, there are those articles and we librarians love to lament about those “perfect” articles that weren't retrieved unless we did some sort of dirty search.

What would be really helpful is if Ovid changed OvidSP Basic's name. Currently as it is named, it implies that it is a simpler version than Ovid Sytnax, and that is just not the case. You are going to have librarians and power users trying to force it to do a "simple" Ovid Syntax search and we now know that isn't pretty. Regular or first time users are going to think searching it is searching all of MEDLINE and we know that isn't the case either. I am not sure what you would name it. "A Few Good Articles," while descriptive, is probably too long for the pretty tabs on the display. I guess that is why I am a librarian and not in marketing.

So, I have changed my stance on OvidSP Basic. Once, I wouldn't recommend it, now I think it could be a good tool if used correctly. Use it to find a few good articles on exactly what you typed in the search box. Know that the results are not the end all be all of medical literature on the topic. Personally, I would list and describe the two search methods separately as two different products on my website. I would still have a link for Ovid Medline which would go to OvidSP Syntax. I would create another link that would say something like A Few Good Articles and it would go to OvidSP Basic. That way the users have the option to search either product when they need just a few good articles or in depth research.

January’s Resource of the Month

I am back from vacation in St. Louis and it is time for me to get back into the work swing of things. So without further ado, here is January's Resource of the Month.

PsycEXTRA on OvidIdeal for researchers, students, and health professionals working in pscyhological, psychiatric, and mental healthcare and support, PsycEXTRA is the latest addition to Ovid's suite of psychology product line from the APA.

Try it now at Ovid
Learn more about PsycEXTRA from Ovid

RSS Button Subscribe to this feed.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
       
 
The Krafty Librarian has been a medical librarian since 1998. She is currently the medical librarian for a hospital system in Ohio. You can email her at: