2023 Sessions & Presentations

The following are the approved presentations for Empirical Librarians 2023.

Track 1: Supporting Patrons’ Original Research

Full Sessions

Systematic Literature Reviews and the classroom: Why the frustration?

Sergio Chaparro, Virginia Commonwealth University

The explosive growth of evidence synthesis methods like systematic literature reviews (SLRs) has reached the higher education classroom. Several graduate and one semester-only courses in the social and behavioral sciences, for example, demand for the students to design and execute SLRs as assignments. In other instances, SLRs have become the de facto components of the dissertation proposal or the prospectus. Academic librarians or liaisons outside the health sciences fields are increasingly supporting SLRs and at the same time verifying empirically, and through their constant interactions with the students and faculty, the frustrations, fears, and inherent stresses which surround the student’s process of learning and executing a systematic literature review.

This session is a critique, reflection, and an analysis of why systematic literature reviews are so frustrating for all: students, faculty, and librarians, particularly when there isn’t a clear understanding on the part of the students and the faculty of the necessary skills and prior knowledge required to produce SLRs. This session also proposes and discusses some practical solutions to those frustrations. For example, the implementation of relevant online searching pre-training for students, the recognition of online searching gaps on the part of faculty and students, and the alignment of portions of SLRs to certain coursework only, all which could alleviate the confusion and frustration that SLRs produce in students and faculty and affect negatively the inclusion of SLRs as educational tools. Pedagogically also, taking steps to ensure that SLRs are adequately and responsibly taught, could become a deterrent against the increasing bastardization of SLRs as empirical research tools and the wrong assumption that SLRs are the magic bullet to educate graduate students about research. Teaching responsibly about SLRs demand a great degree of honesty about their scope and their limitations.

Queer(ing) Learning: Potentials and Pitfalls of a Collaboratively-Designed Program to Support LGBTQIA2+ Research and Education

Jen Bonnet, Lily Herakova, and Tausif Karim, University of Maine

Conservative movements in the U.S. and globally target education related to LGBTQIA2+ issues and communities as ideological propaganda (del Valle, 2022). Some of the most banned books in educational settings include LGBTQIA2+ characters (ALA, 2022), and legislation regulating learning content seeks to limit exposure to and consideration of non-cisheteronormative ways of being and knowing (Sawchuk, 2022). Libraries can play a key role in reshaping this reality by co-constructing environments where learners engage with difference and grow their capacities for cultural responsiveness in a world of diverse, multidimensional human experiences. Such “queering” of learning spaces in academic libraries, particularly in programmatic efforts, plays a “vital role in student development and success” (Kasten-Mutkus, 2020, p. 431). Drawing on this, and on calls for academic libraries to more actively shape social justice efforts and agendas (Morales et al., 2014), in this session we will present our interactive, week-long asynchronous program, The LGBTQIA2+ Learning and Affirming Challenge, and emerging findings from research on its impact and effectiveness.

Initiated by a graduate student, and collaboratively designed with a faculty advisor and liaison librarians, this Challenge included five days of content, with brief tasks designed to learn, listen, share, and take action around topics related to sexual orientation, gender identity, intersectionality, and LGBTQIA2+-affirming class curricula. Consistent with queer communication pedagogy (Atay & Pensoneau-Conway, 2018), we centered queer voices and experiences, provided opportunities for counter-readings of diverse texts, paid attention to intersectionality (specifically linked to gender, sexuality, and decolonial and transnational ways of knowing and being), and created structured guidance to envision and enact change. Join us to learn about our process of shared learning, how we are studying the potential impact of this program, and how this type of collaboration not only enhances student research, but also grows librarian subject expertise.

ALA, https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10

Atay & Pensoneau-Conway, https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9781315159164/queer-communication-pedagogy-ahmet-atay-sandra-pensoneau-conway

Kasten-Mutkus, https://preprint.press.jhu.edu/portal/article/programming-pedagogy-academic-library

Sawchuk, https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/beyond-dont-say-gay-other-states-seek-to-limit-lgbtq-youth-teaching/2022/04

del Valle, https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/ohio-florida-dont-say-gay-bill/index.html

Lightning Talks

Librarians Launching Success in the Era of Coding as an Essential Researcher Literacy

Daniel Kerchner, George Washington University Libraries

There is data in virtually every field of academic pursuit, and coding is a critical tool for exploring, visualizing, and discovering insights in data. For today’s students and researchers, coding is not merely a tool; it is an essential literacy. Librarians at George Washington University have responded to this reality by offering an increasingly popular set of services where we share our passion for coding with students, faculty, and researchers who are equally passionate to learn to code in order to unleash the data with which they are eager to derive original research. This shift has not only transformed the role of the library, but it has radically changed us as librarians as well. This brief presentation aims to challenge academic libraries and librarians to do more to empower their communities with the data and coding skills they so desperately seek, to suggest practical steps, and to provide reassurance that the risks are worth the rewards.

Teaching Digital Tools for Qualitative Analysis in a Teaching-Centered College

Heather Barnes, Wake Forest University

Although computation-intensive, quantitative data analysis and “big data” remain essential topics in library research data services, the Z. Smith Reynolds Library at Wake Forest University has cultivated a small but consistent cohort of faculty scholars interested in using digital tools for collecting, transcribing, and analyzing digital forms of qualitative data (i.e. transcribed interviews, A/V data sources, Tweets, and scraped websites). Our qualitative research support model has evolved over the years to encompass 1-1 project-term consultations to small Faculty Learning Circles.

Track 2: Performing research in libraries

Full Sessions

Using Website Content Analysis to Assess the Prevalence of Affordable Textbook Initiatives at ARL Libraries

Zara Wilkinson, Rutgers University-Camden

Websites are one of the primary ways academic libraries communicate information about their services, spaces, and collections to current or potential library users. Users expect these websites to present the information they need, as well as to communicate the values and priorities of the library and its administration. For these reasons, library websites can be analyzed to draw conclusions about the online user experience or to gather data about the prevalence or presentation of specific content across libraries. This paper will share the development of a project that used a website content analysis approach to gather information about textbook affordability initiatives at university libraries that are members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Publicly available information on institutional websites was gathered in order to (1) determine to what degree ARL libraries maintain textbook affordability programs and (2) identify common characteristics of extant textbook affordability programs at ARL libraries.

At many higher education institutions, libraries are a vital player in the promotion of textbook affordability and open educational resources (OER), with the goals of relieving financial strain on students, supporting retention of students from underrepresented and socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, and encouraging pedagogical innovation. Despite this emerging area of focus, much of the scholarly library and information science literature on textbook affordability programs has focused on the design and/or assessment of a single initiative, whether at a specific institution or at the state or consortia level. As a result, the LIS field lacks substantial information about the wider landscape of textbook affordability programs, particularly the prevalence of such programs either in general or across types of institutions. Website content analysis provides an opportunity to gather broader data about the field, promoting a deeper understanding of textbook affordability in academic libraries and providing opportunities for benchmarking among ARL members and their peer and aspirant institutions.

Diversifying and improving LIS literature through an open-source professional development program

Charissa Powell, University of Delaware
Chelsea Heinbach, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Hailley Fargo, Northern Kentucky University
Nimisha Bhat, Smith College

This presentation will include an overview of LibParlor Online Learning, a free, open-source online curriculum of learning modules, and share how this professional development program will build the capacity for academic Library and Information Science (LIS) professionals to conduct and publish rigorous original research.

The lack of affordable, accessible, and effective training opportunities means many librarians do not have the resources, time, or support to learn how to do research, and this leads to a field that lacks diverse, inclusive, and robust scholarship. The presenters have created grant funded open-source online curriculum that will provide LIS professionals with the foundational knowledge and specialized skills necessary to conduct and publish rigorous original research. This work will democratize the often privileged information around research and publishing in an effort toward diversifying and improving LIS literature.

Attendees will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the curriculum to make the curriculum stronger for future researchers. Session attendees will also learn how this program could be of use to their own professional development and those in the field. Presenters will provide time in the presentation for attendees to reflect on their own research needs and to think about their future professional development needs on this topic.

Exploring Faculty Engagement with OER through a Librarian-Faculty Research Partnership

Jessica Kirschner, Hillary Miller, Preeti Kamat, Sergio Chaparro, Jose Alcaine, Nina Exner
Virginia Commonwealth University

Open practices such as open access publishing and open educational resources (OER) have emerged as an option to increase access to scholarly outputs by removing financial, legal, and technological barriers to access and reuse of scholarship and teaching materials. However, while faculty engagement with open practices is increasing, there still remain barriers to widespread participation. Our interdisciplinary collaboration between librarians and a School of Education faculty and graduate student undertook a pilot study to identify those faculty-perceived barriers and evaluate their relative influence on faculty decisions. This study employed an explanatory sequential mixed method research design, which included a web-based survey and follow-up interviews and focus groups with faculty to elaborate on survey responses. The project team hopes to use the findings from the analysis of collected data to identify and recommend potential pathways to increase faculty engagement with open practices, including influencing library support and outreach.

Valid Questions: Developing and Validating a Learning Analytics Survey

Andrew Asher, Indiana University – Bloomington
Abigail Goben, University of Illinois Chicago
Kristin Briney, California Institute of Technology

As librarians conduct learning analytics projects, they frequently rely upon single-site surveys to capture information from students. However, many surveys are developed in a restricted fashion, with limited testing prior to launch and where statistical validation was not conducted to assess potential flaws. Additionally, final instruments are only occasionally shared and reused. These factors compound to limit the availability of validated and trusted instruments. As part of a larger grant project which involved multiple methodologies, we sought to create a tested and reproducible survey instrument to meet the community need for a shared tool to appraise student opinions of library learning analytics.

The survey development process included: team question development drawing on previous research themes; pre-administrative survey question validation including both subject matter expert review and cognitive interviews with students; a single-site test of the full survey prior to coordinated distribution across multiple universities; statistical assessment of sampling and response rate; documentation of data standardization including removal of identifying variables and formatting data for content analysis; specifying potential sources of bias; and extensive statistical tests to appraise reliability and concept validation of the instrument.

Comprehensive description of these steps helped elucidate the extensive effort required to ensure that the survey captured the information from students that the research team sought. It also revealed the challenges of working with binary information, highly variable demographic information, and the need to properly identify appropriate sampling clusters when conducting this type of research. In this presentation, we will examine the development, validation, execution, and statistical assessment of a reproducible survey which sought to obtain student feedback on library learning analytics participation.

Including Nontraditional Students as Research Participants in Mixed Methods Research: Methods for Reaching Out to Students Aged 25 Years or Older

Michelle Keba Knecht, Florida Atlantic University Schmidt College of Medicine

Nontraditional students, those who are aged 25 years or older, have been gaining visibility at colleges and universities in recent years. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (n.d.), in fall 2019 about 1/3 of the students enrolled in colleges and universities in the US were 25 years of age or older. Nontraditional students may be working full time while attending school and many institutions tailor programs to them by offering courses in the evenings or online. As more colleges and universities try to attract students from this market, librarians should adjust their research methods to reach out to these nontraditional students.

In this presentation, I will share how I conducted a mixed methods research study with nontraditional students that explored the role curiosity plays in the research process. I will discuss lessons learned including how to partner with teaching faculty to increase student participation and how to conduct a mixed methods study which triangulated data from validated survey instruments, qualitative interviews, and annotated bibliographies rated on the Information Literacy VALUE rubric. I will also explain how I was able to include email and virtual interviewing techniques to specifically encourage nontraditional students to participate in the study. This session will be of interest to librarians who would like to include nontraditional students as participants in their research as well as those who are interested in techniques for conducting mixed methods studies.

National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.) Student Enrollment: How many students ages 25 and over enroll in postsecondary institutions in the fall? U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/TrendGenerator/app/answer/2/8#:~:text=Student%20Enrollment%3A%20How%20many%20students,is%20based%20on%205%2C961%20institutions.

Librarian Perspectives on Research Collaborations

Dede Rios, University of the Incarnate Word
Lindsay Blake, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

Objective: The purpose of this research is to explore how health science librarians find collaborative research partners, how they build these relationships, and what scholarly products are produced.

Methods: Authors selected mixed methods research design to provide both a basic overview and an in depth interpretation of how health science librarians collaborate. After a review of the literature an online survey designed, peer-reviewed, and distributed through various professional library and academic listservs during Fall 2021. The survey was a combination of multiple choice questions for quantitative analysis and open-ended questions for qualitative analysis. Health Sciences librarians were queried about where they found collaborative partners, how they built collaborative relationships, products produced during these collaborations, and what made collaborations successful or unsuccessful.

Results: The survey returned 142 overall survey responses. The majority of respondents found collaborators within their institution and had collaborated both with library and outside faculty in their careers. Librarian collaborations more frequently produced conference presentations followed by publications, while collaborations with outside faculty showed the opposite trend. Most collaborations were maintained through regular communication, having defined roles, and forming interpersonal relationships. Successful projects relied on a common topic of interest, frequent communication, good team dynamics, and strong project management. Conflicts were reported; however, many were resolved through communication, and projects were completed.

Conclusion: Collaboration takes time and effort, so selecting your partners is as important as developing the relationship. Early discussion of scope, theme, roles, and the end product is always important to project completion and avoiding conflict. Conflict does not equate unsuccessful projects; however, it may create hesitancy towards future collaborations.

Assessing patient education materials for empowering and disempowering language using summative content analysis

Lisa M. Acuff, Gwen Geiger Wolfe, and Sally Bowler-Hill , University of New Mexico

Objectives: Type 1 diabetes is a complex chronic disease requiring ongoing self-management. Patient education aims to empower people living with the disease to set goals and choose behaviors that support optimal outcomes. Disempowering language, however, can undermine self-management and psychosocial outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess patient education materials for adults living with type 1 diabetes for the presence of disempowering language and empowering alternatives. Empowering language uses strengths-based and person-first terminology, while disempowering language is characterized by stigmatizing, blaming, and out-of-date terms with negative connotations, and disease-first terminology.

Methods: Patient education materials will be identified through a Google search using the terms “type 1 diabetes patient education materials”. Publicly available online materials from academic, clinical, government, and health-related organizations will be included. Selected materials will target adult patients and feature diagnosis-related content (basics, overview, or information for newly diagnosed). It is anticipated that the first 10 relevant results will be assessed. A checklist of empowering and disempowering terminology will be created using the ADA/ADCES’s framework. The checklist will guide a summative content analysis of the materials, which will quantify the language and explore the context of empowering and disempowering word usage. A binary indicator for any, versus no, words with disempowering language will be applied to each material. Dedoose will be used for coding word context.

Results: Preliminary results will be shared in a revised abstract and at the conference.

Conclusions: Insights for using summative content analysis will be discussed. Preliminary results will also be discussed with comparisons to previous literature. Implications for health information professions will be highlighted along with recommendations for empowering language in type 1 diabetes patient education materials.

Qualitative research design and the librarian researcher: Strategies for selecting an approach

Elaine Thornton, University of Utah

This presentation explores choosing and applying qualitative research methodologies. Academic librarians may accept jobs in institutions where librarians are expected to do research and publish. Some will find this daunting since they may not have taken research courses during their library or information science degree programs. They may not feel prepared to carry out original research. Librarian researchers can adopt the techniques discussed in this session and implement qualitative study approaches. This presentation aims to help novice researchers choose and apply qualitative approaches. The presenter highlights her past and current research as examples of selecting and implementing qualitative methodologies and will discuss method decision strategies, data collection, and analysis. The presenter will also share a decision tool and a list of resources with session participants.

Affective Experiences of Librarians Asking for Co-Authorship and Other Authorship Considerations for Librarians

Jamie Bloss and Kerry Sewell, East Carolina University
Jana Schellinger, Emory & Henry College
Amanda Haberstroh, East Carolina University

Introduction: Health sciences librarians are increasingly engaging in scholarly publication, both with other librarians undertaking research projects, and as members of research teams in other disciplines outside the library. We studied the contexts of authorship among health sciences librarians, including emotions experienced during authorship negotiation, the frequency with which authorship is denied, and the correlation of perceived support from supervisors and the research community with the number of publications produced. This research serves as a first step to understanding authorship contexts among health science librarians and if the stress and anxiety surrounding authorship negotiation, we were hearing about anecdotally was the norm for librarian researchers.

Methods: The team decided to undertake a quantitative study. 342 medical and health sciences librarians responded to an invitation to complete an online survey comprising 47 questions regarding asking for authorship credit, denial of credit, if they were given authorship without asking, and how supported they felt to do original research in their current roles.

Results: We found that authorship negotiation evokes many emotions among librarians. The emotions reported differed significantly in some cases when negotiating authorship with other librarians versus negotiating authorship with professionals in another field. Negative emotions were reported when asking for authorship. Positively, respondents reported feeling mostly supported and encouraged in their workplaces and research communities. Nearly one quarter (24.4%) of respondents reported being denied authorship by colleagues outside of their departments, although the reasons were not investigated by this study. Perceived research appreciation and support by the research community is correlated with the total number of articles or publications produced by librarians.

Conclusion: Librarians reported a variety of affective experiences when asking for authorship. Authorship experiences were influenced by the composition of the research teams as well as institutional support for research engagement. More research and discussion need to occur to further understand authorship concerns for librarians.

The Seen and the Unseen: Grappling with the Benefits and Drawbacks of Visual Methods in LIS Research

Alissa Droog, Northern Illinois University
Kari D. Weaver, University of Waterloo
Frances Brady, Adler University

Though long used in social science fields like anthropology and sociology, visual research methods are starting to receive more notice in the library and information science field (Bedi & Webb, 2020). These methods offer particularly useful insights on existing research questions, more complete and comprehensive data, greater flexibility when working with diverse populations, and greater ease in representing abstract concepts like information, group work, and research. Additionally, visual methods can engender more participatory relationships between researcher and subject that can be empowering to research participants (Pollak, 2017).

In this session, the presenters will define visual research methods and their strengths and weaknesses before discussing their own experiences selecting and running a research study using a visual research method. The presenters will pay particular attention to the ethical considerations for consent and copyright related to their research method, and considerations for publication. The session is designed for attendees with an interest in exploring the benefits, drawbacks, and broader publication considerations of visual research methods in library and information science.


Bedi, S., & Webb, J. (2020). Visual research methods: An introduction for library and information studies. Facet Publishing.

Pollak, A. (2017). Visual research in LIS: Complementary and alternative methods. Library & Information Science Research, 39(2), 98-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.04.002

Lightning Talks

Using Research to Direct the Development of LibGuides as Open Educational Resources

Deborah L Lauseng, Carmen Howard, Jung Mi Scoulas, and Allan Berry, University of Illinois Chicago

The research team sought to fill a gap in knowledge of who was using our popular LibGuide (Evidence Based Medicine Guide), why they were using the guide, and if the guide was being used as an open educational resource (OER). Based on evidence gathered from multiple data points (user survey, Google Analytics, and Springshare), the authors converted the guide into an OER and published findings supporting this transition. These findings led the authors to shift into the current longitudinal study comparing OER versus pre-OER use of the guide and self-reported user learning outcomes. Data collection is underway, employing multiple data points with expanded survey questions. In this talk, the authors will share preliminary findings, how we refined our data collection methods, how we use the Project Outcome Model to evaluate users’ learning outcomes, and lessons learned thus far. Beyond measuring impact, the analysis of our ongoing assessment will inform administrative decision-making regarding staffing allocations supporting additional OER guides. This research will potentially provide insights into the use of traditional websites as OER, further the understanding of the need for fully OER information products, and help to define end-user benefits gained by the investment of staff time in producing online informational assets that are in the public domain to retain, revise, remix, redistribute, and reuse.

Scholarly literature as our evidence base: Pilot study to describe LIS research reporting completeness

Rachel Hinrichs, Sara Lowe, Sean Stone, and Heather Coates, Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis

The quality of research of a human service discipline such as library and information science (LIS) affects researchers and practitioners. Librarians depend upon reliable, evidence-based information to provide relevant and effective services. A strong body of evidence is foundational for making data-informed decisions and in demonstrating the value of library services. It also enhances the ability of LIS practitioners and researchers to build upon and apply research findings.
Using a stratified sample of articles indexed in the Library, Information Science, and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) database, the presenters evaluated the reporting quality of LIS articles. Each article was evaluated by two coders. Discrepancies between coders on relevance, setting, topics, research type, methods, and evidence were resolved via discussion to reach consensus.
This project was designed to inform the development of a set of reporting guidelines for LIS research, which has the potential to reduce bias in publishing and peer review as well as improve the LIS scholarly record as a source of evidence. Reporting guidelines provide evidence-based specifications of the minimum set of information required to report the results of various study types, helping to ensure transparent and comprehensive reporting of research. Guidelines would support librarians in critically appraising the literature for re-use in their practice as well as offering a stronger foundation on which to build future research. Reporting guidelines are a much needed tool for LIS professionals in many capacities – as authors, editors and readers.
This session will report presenters’ research methods, mistakes, lessons learned, and implications for the field. Additionally, the session will present some results. Complete pilot results will be made available to participants, including descriptive statistics and correlations between quality of reporting, library setting, types of research conducted, and publication type as well as common mistakes made in reporting.

Using Mixed Methods to Investigate the Impact of an Information Literacy Course on Perceptions and Use of a Library Web Portal

Yu-Hui Chen, University at Albany, State University of New York

Academic libraries develop web portals to effectively facilitate seamless access to services and resources otherwise unavailable through search engines. However, many students tend to rely on Google or other Internet search engines to find information for their studies. Researchers indicate that user technology acceptance is connected to behavioral intention. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) proposes that an individual’s intention to use or acceptance of an information system/technology in question is determined by two prominent beliefs: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Additionally, the IS Success Framework suggests that information quality, system quality, and service quality embedded in an information system can affect a user’s intention to use and user satisfaction. In addition to these crucial aspects, studies show that user training is positively associated with information system acceptance and usage. Using TAM and IS Success framework as theoretical foundations, the author conducted a longitudinal study applying a mixed methods approach (i.e., surveys followed by interviews) to determine if a credit-bearing information literacy (IL) course would positively influence undergraduate students’ perceptions and use of a library Web portal over a period of seven months. Researchers use quantitative research to develop and test hypotheses, as well as generate models and theories that explain phenomena. Qualitative investigators explore an issue in depth by seeking information from the people who are experiencing or are involved in the issue. In this presentation, the author will share with attendees how both the short-term and long-term effects of the IL course were measured for hypothesis testing, the role of qualitative data gathered in this study, as well as lessons learned in the process.

Getting what you pay for in research data services

Jeffrey C. Oliver and Fernando Rios, University of Arizona

Academic libraries are being called on to provide more research-oriented services as the need for access to big data, and the skills to use big data, are expanding across several domains. This recent growth warrants investigation into the types of services offered and the factors influencing such support. We investigated the type and mode of research data services at 25 Research 1 universities, and asked how these services were influenced by academic libraries’ resourcing. Focusing on 17 specific service types, we found considerable variation in the total number of services offered at each institution. Considering three categories of data services (data management, data science, and geospatial), we found a significant effect of the category of service on the mode of service delivery (web resources, consults, and instruction). We also found that academic libraries’ resourcing, as measured by total salary expenditures, had a positive effect on the number of data services offered. We discuss possible reasons for variation in modality among categories of data services and implications for the influence of resourcing on data service offerings. We close with a discussion of possible solutions to address research data service needs in resource-scarce conditions.

How to Empirically Assess a Consultation Form

Sergio Chaparro and Julie Arendt, Virginia Commonwealth University

There are multiple ways to conduct a reference interview, but in the case of complex questions such as graduate research inquiries like scoping reviews, systematic reviews, etc., use of a tool that facilitates the communication between the liaison and the patron seems to be necessary. These complex queries include multiple steps and are challenging for both the patron and the librarian to hold in memory without a written record. Such questions may also involve multiple, repeated interactions, where documentation of progress thus far is useful. Such a form also can include procedural details, such as search queries to be repeated later. Administratively, reference interview forms could be compiled to document the complexity and importance of the liaison librarian’s work

It seems that using a form is better for both the librarian and the patron. Research about such forms is mostly descriptive and rarely includes plans for the forms’ assessment. What should be the plan for designing and assessing a form of this type?

This work-in-progress presentation will discuss the form that is being used by a librarian for complex questions and will present a draft assessment plan for the form. The presentation will include both the reasoning behind the empirical choices thus far and questions for the audience about empirical choices that are still undecided.

Case-based EPA 7 instruction for osteopathic medical students: A quantifiable assessment of EBM instruction

Laura Lipke, A.T. Still University

To address the Evidence-based medicine (EBM) learning needs of osteopathic medical students and to ensure that the students meet the Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) core competencies prior to residency placement, this proposed study will quantifiably demonstrate the effectiveness of case-based learning (CBL) when compared to traditional lecture-based learning through a randomized control study design. This study design proposes to provide quantifiable measures to the effectiveness of CBL, guidance for future EBM instructional design and quantifiable evidence to the effectiveness of librarian-led EBM instruction sessions. Students will be randomly assigned to a traditional lecture-based instruction session and a CBL lab session. The assignment designed for both the control and intervention groups will be based on a clinically relevant patient scenario. Participants of both groups will be asked to develop a clinical question and find supporting evidence, as outlined in the AACOM entrustable professional activities (EPA) competencies. These variables of performance will be evaluated by a modified version of the Fresno test. Although this study will not be implemented until Fall of 2023, the pilot run implementing CBL EBM instruction for osteopathic medical students highlighted key factors to improve the effectiveness of the Fresno grading rubric. In this presentation, the author will highlight the details of case-based learning, the purpose of the proposed study methodology, and what modifications will be required prior to study implementation to ensure the accuracy of the Fresno grading rubric.

Librarian Supported Health Literacy Instruction in Employee Wellness Programs

Colleen Foy, Wake Forest University

According to the Centers for Disease Control’s National Health Statistics Report published in June 2021, the US prepandemic prevalence of obesity in adults aged 20 and older was 41.9% – up 6.2% in just 10 years relative to 2009-2010 data. Considering obesity-related physical, social, mental, and behavioral health conditions, this epidemic requires multidisciplinary attention. Furthermore, and with obesity-centric statistics aside, the Global Wellness Institute reported the US composing 28% of the global wellness market in 2020 translating into $1.2 trillion spent on various health and wellness aids ranging from preventative health to physical activity and traditional medicine. Are consumers well informed – or adequately health literate – before spending trillions on medical, health, and wellness aids?

An individual’s attainment of health literacy (HL) includes the ability to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions and actions for themselves and others. Existing literature addresses the relationship between healthy outcomes and individual HL; however, research performed by librarians as literacy experts in the health and wellness arena is lacking.

In fall 2022 and spring 2023 semesters, the Science Librarian at Wake Forest University (WFU), will assess participant baseline and completion health information literacy (HIL) levels in two WFU employee wellness programs. Healthy Exercise & Lifestyle ProgramS (HELPS) offers a six-month weight management and three-month wellness program designed to support individuals striving to achieve various healthy lifestyle modifications. In partnership with HELPS program experts, the librarian will advocate for and include librarian-facilitated HIL instruction to support literacy development and understanding among participants. Research will include pre-post surveys measuring HIL level identifiers. The study will serve as an excellent example for libraries to promote outreach services among faculty and staff.

This proposed lightning talk will include research and instructional design components, initial outcomes from fall semester cohorts, and proposed next steps for future research.

Participant Recruitment in the New Hybrid Era of Library Research: Bringing Together the Onsite and Online Worlds

Barbara M. Sorondo, University of Miami
Sarah J. Hammill and Christopher M. Jimenez, Florida International University

As we settle into a hybrid work mode, our university libraries have an increased online presence compared to before the coronavirus pandemic, necessitating updates to not only library services but also research, including data collection, participant recruitment, and more. In 2016, when we worked almost exclusively in person, we distributed an online survey that assessed affect, personality, and job satisfaction to all library employees at a large, urban research university. We found recruitment was most successful when conducted in offices, conference rooms, elevators, and around the water cooler. In 2021, when we worked almost exclusively online, we redistributed the same online survey, including a new measure on burnout, to the same library employees, but altered our recruitment process in light of the change in work mode compared to the previous iteration. Due to the similarity in the study methodology and data collection materials, we were able to directly compare recruitment in each mode, whether predominantly in person (2016) or online (2021). The response rate during both periods was similar, with a 48% response rate in the initial study and a 42% response rate in the follow-up study. In this lightning talk, we discuss how we engaged in participant recruitment in each work mode and share the lessons we learned. Attendees will learn tips and tricks to enhance recruitment in their libraries in the new hybrid era, bringing together the onsite and online worlds.

The Cycles Never End: Reflections on using a Participatory Action Research approach to guide collaborative work projects

Eleanor Colla, University of Melbourne

Participatory Action Research (PAR) “involves a spiral of cycles of inquiry … [wherein] each cycle emerges from and builds on the last, and over time leads to increased capacity for learning, action, and change” (Anderson et al, 2015). Each cycle within PAR is often seen as having four elements; planning, acting, observing, and reflecting (Anderson et al, 2015). Taking this collaborative and iterative approach, PAR was used by the presenter as the research methodology that underpinned a large, library-wide project, taking place over several months. This project was a review and update of a University Library’s centralised research support offerings, with the aim to define what research support services were supported, how they were supported, and who was involved in providing these services. This work involved input from across the library, most notably discipline-specialist librarians and topic-specialist librarians. Utilising PAR, assisted in ensuring two-way engagement and iteration, guidance and check-in points throughout the project, and embedded continual, iterative development. This lightning talk will reflect on this approach, lessons learned, what spiral the project lead is currently on, and what this may transition into.

Altmetric Research for the Non-Coder

Jess Newman McDonald, University of Tennessee Health Science Center

Abstract: APIs power a large portion of modern bibliometric research. As such, working with APIs is an increasingly common competency for scholarly communications and data librarians. Such work typically requires a familiarity with tools such as Python and code editors as well as GitHub or other documentation sources. While many resources and learning opportunities exist (such as Library Carpentry workshops) to teach these skills, the nuances and idiosyncrasies of doing API powered research can leave many librarians feeling frustrated and lost. As one of those frustrated librarians who nonetheless aspired to work with Altmetric and bibliographic data, I cobbled together an approach that didn’t require any coding. Relying only on CSV exportable data from Scopus and Altmetric.com, I was able to construct a dataset with Excel and Access for planned research on the impact of publishing model on Altmetric Attention Scores.