This document discusses evidence-based library and information practice (EBLIP). It defines EBLIP as making data-driven decisions by integrating the best available research evidence with professional expertise and user needs. The key aspects of EBLIP discussed are formulating answerable questions, searching for relevant evidence from various sources, critically appraising the evidence, making and implementing decisions, and evaluating outcomes. Examples of evidence sources and research methods used in EBLIP are provided. The overall goal of EBLIP is to improve library services and demonstrate impact through more informed decision making.
6. “an approach to information
science that promotes the
collection, interpretation and
integration of valid, important and
applicable user-reported, librarianobserved, and research-derived
evidence…
7. …the best available evidence,
moderated by user needs and
preferences, is applied to improve
the quality of professional
judgements.”
(booth, 2000)
13. more informed decision-making
reduce risk of error
demonstrate impact
supports best practice policy & processes
more efficient use of resources
more effective services
16. formulate an answerable question
search for best available evidence
critically appraise the evidence
make a decision and apply it
evaluate performance
(eldredge, 2000)
18. cultivate the habit
capture immediately
reframe to find the real question
prioritize how important is this?
courage to ask something new
(eldredge, 2006)
20. using existing evidence
local evidence:
User surveys e.g. LibQual
Annual reports
Usage statistics – eresources, circulation, il instruction etc.
external evidence:
LISTA: Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts
LISA: Library and Information Science Abstracts
Emerald Management Xtra
ERIC (Education)
21. “encouraging librarians to
conduct research where there
is a lack of evidence is vital
to the growth of ebl”
(crumley & koufogiannakis, 2002)
22. research
systematic enquiry, collecting & interpreting
evidence or data to answer a question
three
‘flavours’
of eblip
evaluation
focuses on service effectiveness, practical in nature, designed to
bring about change & action
audit
a ‘quality check’ against a defined standard – are we doing
“what it says on the tin”?
(grant et al. (eds.), 2013)
23. bibliometric analysis
case study
cohort study
content analysis
delphi method
document studies
experimentation
focus group
historical study
interview
observational study
questionnaire
systematic (lit) review
usability study
27. is the study a close representation of
the truth?
are the results credible & repeatable?
will the results help my own practice?
(booth & brice, 2004)
31. process evaluation
develops consistency across individuals / teams
was it the right method / approach?
what can we do better next time?
outcome evaluation
what does it mean in practice for our users?
how effective was the intervention?
short term and long term impacts?
37. evidence based
library & information
practice
thank you
questions? michelle.dalton@ucd.ie
@mishdalton
38. eblip resources
eblip journal
http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/eblip
journal tocs (alerts for 250+ lis journals)
http://bit.ly/RZySzG
annual eblip conference proceedings
http://eblip7.library.usask.ca
eblip wiki (univ of minnesota)
https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/HSL/EBLIP.html
evidence based toolkit for public libraries
http://ebltoolkit.pbworks.com/
the researching librarian
http://www.researchinglibrarian.com
39. references
Bayley, L., & McKibbon, A. (2006). Evidence-based librarianship: a personal perspective from the medical/nursing realm. Library Hi
Tech, 24(3), 317-323.
Booth, A., & Brice, A. (2004), "Appraising the evidence", in Booth, A., Brice, A. (Eds),Evidence-Based Practice for Information
Professionals, Facet Publishing, London, pp.104-18. http://www.facetpublishing.co.uk/downloads/file/sample_chapters/481.pdf
Booth, A. (2000, July). Librarian heal thyself: Evidence based librarianship, useful, practical, desirable? 8th International Congress on
Medical Librarianship, London
Crumley, E., and Koufogiannakis, D. (2002). Developing evidence-based librarianship: practical steps for implementation. Health
Information and Libraries Journal, 19(2), 61-70.
Derven, C., Kendlin, V. (2011) Evidence-based librarianship : a case study of a print resource cancellation project. The Journal of
Academic Librarianship, 37 (2), pp.166-170.
Eldredge, J. D. (2000). Evidence-based librarianship: An overview. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 88(4), 289302. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC35250/pdf/i0025-7338-088-04-0289.pdf
Eldredge, J. (2006). Evidence-based librarianship: the EBL process. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 341-354.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1571813&show=abstract
Foasberg, N. M. (2013). Student Reading Practices in Print and Electronic Media. Accepted for publication in College & Research
Libraries, June 2013.
Glynn, L (2006). EBLIP Critical Appraisal Checklist for Library Research.
http://www.newcastle.edu.au/service/library/gosford/ebl/toolkit/docs/EBL%20Critical%20Appraisal%20Checklist.pdf
Grant, M.J. et al. (2013). Research, Evaluation and Audit: Key steps in demonstrating your value. Facet: London.
Koufogiannakis, D. (2012). Academic Librarians’ Conception and Use of Evidence Sources in Practice. Evidence Based Library And
Information Practice, 7(4), 5-24.
http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/18072/14560
Lown, C., Sierra, T., & Boyer, J. (2013). How users search the library from a single search box. College & Research Libraries, 74(3),
227-241.
Sackett et al. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 312(7023), 71.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
Van Epps, A., & Sapp Nelson, M. (2013). One-shot or Embedded? Assessing Different Delivery Timing for Information Resources
Relevant to Assignments. Evidence Based Library And Information Practice, 8(1), 4-18.
http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/18027
Frog image: http://dreamofanotaku.deviantart.com/art/Duckweed-Frog-200304942
Data image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Transmediale-2010-Ryoji_Ikeda-Data-Tron-2.jpg
The Librarian (Wolfgang Lazius): http://arthistory.about.com/od/from_exhibitions/ig/arcimboldo_paris/gaml1007_01.htm
Jenga image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashleymackinnon/7645861006/
Notes de l'éditeur
EBL is not to be confused with making data driven decisions, but is about integrating data and evidence to inform decision-making rather than drive it.
Metrics should not make a decision for you!
Sometimes you need to respond quickly, so have to rely on your best judgment at the time. Decisions are often complex and not straightforward, and you need to balance different and even conflicting needs and priorities
Systematic and informed decision-making is also easier to sell and justify to management
For gathering ‘new’ data you can use a variety of methods and techniques
The point of the pyramid represents the highest ‘quality’ evidence, but you still need to appraise and evaluate every study.
It should be clear, transparent and easy to understand
It should be valid, reliable, rigorous and objective (free from bias) so that others will take it on board
Evidence on its own is of little use, it should ultimately be used to lead to a change or improvement in policies, processes or services.
You need to communicate your decision – and tailor your message to your target audience
library staff (meetings, policies, manuals, intranet)
management (institutional reports, committees)
users (the web, social media, print, signage)
the wider community (conferences, journals)
EBLIP is a continuous process – evaluate how you made the decision and also what the impact or effect of the decision is/was – remember short term and long term outcomes
Having this kind of evidence helps us make better use of limited budgets to ensure the ‘right’ resources are cancelled when necessary
Having this kind of evidence can help inform purchasing decisions regarding which resources to switch from print to electronic formats and vice versa.
Having this kind of evidence can highlight the instructional needs of our students and help inform the content and design of our IL classes, as well as how our systems are designed