A current perspective on medical informatics and health sciences librarianship

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA (Impact Factor: 0.99). 05/2005; 93(2):199-205.
Source: PubMed


OBJECTIVE: The article offers a current perspective on medical informatics and health sciences librarianship. NARRATIVE: The authors: (1) discuss how definitions of medical informatics have changed in relation to health sciences librarianship and the broader domain of information science; (2) compare the missions of health sciences librarianship and health sciences informatics, reviewing the characteristics of both disciplines; (3) propose a new definition of health sciences informatics; (4) consider the research agendas of both disciplines and the possibility that they have merged; and (5) conclude with some comments about actions and roles for health sciences librarians to flourish in the biomedical information environment of today and tomorrow. SUMMARY: Boundaries are disappearing between the sources and types of and uses for health information managed by informaticians and librarians. Definitions of the professional domains of each have been impacted by these changes in information. Evolving definitions reflect the increasingly overlapping research agendas of both disciplines. Professionals in these disciplines are increasingly functioning collaboratively as "boundary spanners," incorporating human factors that unite technology with health care delivery.

Download full-text


Available from: Nancy K Roderer
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Thesis (PhD) - Indiana University, School of Library and Information Science, 2007 Problem: This study explored medical students’ perceptions of Lifelong Learning (LLL) at Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM). The IUSM was selected because it has been in the forefront of the competency-based curriculum movement since 1999, a trend for which IUSM is now a leader among undergraduate medical education (years 1-4 of medical school). This study addressed the following issues: 1) definition of LLL, 2) LLL development, 3) LLL attitudes and behaviors, 4) role models, and 5) LLL and technology. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted at the IUSM. Methods used to select students included random number tables and snowballing techniques. Results: Results focused on three areas: 1) what characterized LLL practices and attitudes of medical students, 2) how these practices and attitudes differed across the four years of medical school, and 3) how medical students use technology to help them cope with information overload. Most often, differences between students’ perceptions of LLL correlated to whether they were preclinical (first- and second-year) or clinical (third- and fourth-year) students. Preclinical students spoke more generally about LLL and its role in their education, whereas clinical students related LLL to the practice of medicine and patient care. Although most students agreed that LLL began as an innate curiosity and that childhood influences were significant in their development of LLL, role models at all stages of their education were deemed extremely important. Medical students’ characterized the Internet as a quick and easy way to access much information but were keenly aware of its limitations, in terms of lack of peer review and reliability. Specific sources were discussed by the students. Conclusions: Implications for information fluency, medical and information science educators are discussed.
    Preview · Article ·
  • Source

    Full-text · Article ·
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explores the distribution of international, regional and national scientific output in health information and communication, indexed in the MEDLINE and LILACS databases, between 1996 and 2005. A selection of articles was based on the hierarchical structure of Information Science in MeSH vocabulary. Four specific domains were determined: health information, medical informatics, scientific communications on healthcare and healthcare communications. The variables analyzed were: most-covered subjects and journals, author affiliation and publication countries and languages, in both databases. The Information Science category is represented in nearly 5% of MEDLINE and LILACS articles. The four domains under analysis showed a relative annual increase in MEDLINE. The Medical Informatics domain showed the highest number of records in MEDLINE, representing about half of all indexed articles. The importance of Information Science as a whole is more visible in publications from developed countries and the findings indicate the predominance of the United States, with significant growth in scientific output from China and South Korea and, to a lesser extent, Brazil.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2007 · Ciencia & saude coletiva
Show more