A follow-up to yesteday’s post on HealthBase:

It wasn’t what I was thinking of when I provided a caveat regarding Wikipedia being used as a source, but apparently some search results have offbeat listings, occasionally with negative associations.

My caveat was in regards to the fact that Wikipedia is what I call a “starting point” for information search, not a source itself.  This actually places it in the same category as HealthBase, in that one should not take any particular piece of information as accurate, but to use the information to follow to primary sources and develop search terms and a broader understanding of the topic.

On HealthBase’s problem:  this is to be expected with new methods of indexing and searching, and this type of problem will tend to show itself with a broad base of users.  I still think it is a great starting point for health information searches, and that the searching algorithm will become more sophisticated over time.

HealthBase is a health information search tool created by Netbase that should be on your short list of resources.

Search results are drawn from a diverse range of resources, including WebMD, PubMed, Medline Plus, and the Mayo Clinic.  NetBase uses a semantic-based indexing system to obtain the context of articles, and provides targeted results categories to allow the user to find specific information on their topic.

It is a very useful service, with the usual caveats regarding health information on the web (they also index health information from Wikipedia, so be sure to check sources).

found via ResourceShelf and TechCrunch

For those who have been following  H1N1 influenza virus news (and those who might expect to get questions about it), the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and Google have launched a new mashup service:

PLOS Currents : Influenza is built utilizing Google Knol and a new service from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) called Rapid Research Notes.  This service allows the user an easy way to follow current research and search for relevant scientific information.

As we approach influenza season, expect greater levels of concern and interest in H1N1.

found via the Official Google Blog

With NASA in the news so much lately(1, 2, 3, 4), it seems a good reminder that the organization has nearly 70 Educator Resource Centers across the country.  These are fantastic resources to tap for information relevant to a wide range of learners.

From the NASA Educator Resource Center Network web site:

• NASA Educator Resource Centers provide services to those in the education community including teachers, scout leaders, public and private schools, homeschoolers, museums, planetariums, colleges and universities, and other education-related groups.

• It helps to be precise about your interests and requests, so have a topic and grade level in mind when you call. ERCs have limited amounts of materials available.

• NASA educational resources fall under categories such as Earth Science, Space Science, Living and Working in Space, Aeronautics, Aerospace, and topics related to Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Geography. Materials are designed to supplement K-University curriculum. Complete curriculum guides are not available from NASA.

I had the opportunity to visit the Educator Resource Center at the Kennedy Space Center a few years ago.  They were helpful, enthusiastic, informative, and had loads of reference material.  It reminded me of what a good library should strive for!

found via the NASA Do-It-Yourself Podcast blog

May All Your Standards Be Simple and Evolvable is a post by John Wilbanks on Science Blog’s Common Knowledge.  It is written with medical data standards in mind, but it could be discussing the state of library data as well:

“…TCP/IP, created simply to move bits between computers, begat a variety of new protocols like FTP, Gopher, Finger, many other protocols that layered atop the basic bits standard. Complexity from simplicity. Attempting to embed file transfer into the bits protocol would have made this whole process a lot harder.”

We are approaching a point in which we will be moving our data out of the cumbersome and outdated MARC format.  It will happen, regardless of the heel-dragging that has been taking place for over 10 years.  The debate is still heated over what we will replace the standard with.

Can we come up with something simple and evolvable?  I define this as being able to build things out of data without having to break the it up into usable chunks.  Have you looked at a MARC (.mrc) record with a text editor?  There is no easy way to determine what much of the data means, and the entire record is one string of information.  You can usually pick out the title, author and a few other things, but mostly it looks like gobbledygook.

If our data were in nice, small, understandable pieces to begin with, with straightforward rules guiding how it was formatted, it would invite innovation and creative use.  We are only hindering ourselves with the complexity and arcane rules; simplicity would serve everyone’s needs far better.

About Herbs, Botanicals, & Other Products has been launched by the Memorial Sloan-Ketterling Cancer Center.

This is a great starting point for finding definitive information on medical use of many nature-derived products and natural healing techniques, including:

• Zinc (and many other vitamins and minerals)
• Willow Bark
• Massage Therapy

The alphabetical list of their articles is a great starting point.  The articles focus on cancer treatment, but the information and resources will offer insight for a broad range of questions.

found via ResourceShelf

Was the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine incident an isolated case, or is it the first of several Elsevier journals that only appear to be legit?

Michael Hansen, CEO Of Elsevier’s Health Sciences Division, issued a statement today that suggests that a division of the company may have created the bogus journal without the knowledge of the top levels of the company:

It has recently come to my attention that from 2000 to 2005, our Australia office published a series of sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures. This was an unacceptable practice, and we regret that it took place.

We are currently conducting an internal review but believe this was an isolated practice from a past period in time. It does not reflect the way we operate today. The individuals involved in the project have long since left the company. I have affirmed our business practices as they relate to what defines a journal and the proper use of disclosure language with our employees to ensure this does not happen again.

Note that this statement uses the phrase “published a series of sponsored article compilation publications”.  Some sleuthing by Jonathan Rochkind and Bill Hooker indicates that Excerpta Medica, a subsidiary of Elsevier, might have published quite a few of these sponsored-yet-unacknowledged journals.

My own poking around Excerpta Medica’s website with Google has produced an interesting Pdf titled Best practices for managing publications through a drug’s lifecycle and balancing scientific rigour and credibility with commercial goals.  The document is a summary of a presentation given at by Hester Kuipers, who at the time was Program Director, Medical Communications for Exerpta Medica.  Here is a brief quote:

Scientific publications in peer-reviewed medical journals are a valuable and credible vehicle to support a medical marketing strategy. Though part of most marketing plans, publications are not a promotional activity, but rather a medical one. The relationship between scientific publications and marketing messages can best be described as the first supporting the second rather than the second driving the first.

The presentation makes it clear that the research must have primacy over the promotion; hopefully the “series of sponsored article compilation publications” turns out to be the exception and not the rule for Exerpta Medica.  Elsevier should investigate this thoroughly and publicly acknowledge the extent of the deception; the credibility of each and every one of their peer-reviewed journals is at stake.

some links found via ResourceShelf and through postings on the Cooperative Information Resources Managemnt (CIRM) list

Ever hear of the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine?  Sounds official, as well as medically specific.  Did you know it was published by Elsevier?  That is is Peer Reviewed?  And that it published an article on the effectiveness of Fosamax?

How about that it was cooked up by Merck as a promotional tool, and that they paid Elsevier to publish it?

I worked in a pharmacy for eight years; I have seen first-hand the differences between the drug manufacturer’s publicity and the actual usefulness of medicines.  I am not too surprised that someone at Merck did this (though not as surprised as I will be if the FDA doesn’t lift a finger to make it clear that this level of deception is unacceptable), but am a little surprised that Elsevier went along (though maybe not too surprised (here, too)).

This is a horrible situation, and library organizations should be demanding that Elsevier establish the bona fides of the journals we pay for, and that our patrons use for their research.  Sure, we can probably trust that the big-name journals are what they say they are, but there are hundreds of obscure journals, with titles sounding just as official as the fake one, that we cannot know for sure who they represent, and how they conduct their research, without a great deal of research.  Elsevier needs to salvage their credibility, and soon.

found via Bibliographic Wilderness

I suspect that Swine Flu is likely to be a common research question for reference departments around the world during the foreseeable future.  I have had an interest in the 1918 influenza epidemic pandemic for several years, and have spent some time this weekend keeping an eye on various resources.

Several good places to start:

• Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Swine Influenza. Reliable and up-to-date information from the U.S. Government.
• CDC Human Swine Flu Investigation.  This page is linked from the above page, but is worthy of its own reference as it details the current state of the outbreak.
• Wikipedia has several pages that are relevant:  A general information Swine influenza page, a 2009 swine flu outbreak page, and a 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States page.  Each of these are especially valuable for their References and Further Reading pages.
• H1N1 Swine Flu Google Maps page.  This is an already sobering, world-wide view of the spread of the outbreak.  Note the legend detailing the meaning of the colors of the markers, as well as whether they contain dots.  Click on the markers for detailed information on that marker’s case(s).

Recognize that there will be a great deal of information pouring through various media, much of it guesswork and possibly incorrect.  Remember that the greatest strength of libraries is our offering not only unfettered access to information, but assisting users in using that information critically.

To illustrate this, I am also linking to one of the best articles I have read on the 1918 influenza pandemic, easily the worst outbreak in modern history:   The Site of origin of the 1918 influenza pandemic and its public health implications.  It details research into the origins of the outbreak, and makes a very strong case for the original location.  Note, however, that even though this was published over five years ago, most histories (including the Wikipedia link earlier in this paragraph) either ignore it or continue with various misconceptions based on incomplete research.

The lesson: encourage thoroughness and critical thinking in research, and recognize that many can and do get it wrong (but many can and do get it right, as well).

This is one of those resources which you hope will not have to be used, but when it helps someone find the information they need, it can be invaluable:

The Unidentified Decedent Reporting System (Warning:  site is definitely not for the squeamish) is the National Association of Medical Examiners online tool for posting information about unidentified bodies across the U.S.  It is a distinctly depressing web site, with hints of sadness and loss in dozens of lives, and the realization that for many of these people there are families and friends without answers.

Along with the Doe Network, this site can help to bring closure to tragedy.

from ResourceShelf

WebWISER is an online access point for WISER, which stands for Wireless Information Sytem for Emergency Responders.  This database of information on hazardous materials is maintained by the National Library of Medicine, and can be used to both find information on known materials, as well as to assist in identifying unknown materials.

WISER is designed to provide Emergency Responders, such as Police, Fire, and Medical personnel, quick information about a wide range of chemicals and their dangers.  Mobile phones, pdas, computers, and the internet can all be used to access the database.

Not only is WISER in its various flavors a great site for reference questions, it should be a part of any organization’s disaster plan, and people should be prepared so they can access it whenever the need arises.  A tutorial is also available.

found via ResourceShelf

This online Flu Clinic Locator, provided by the American Lung Association, is an excellent way to find out where and when flu shots will be available in your area.  A great health resource for your ready-reference information or even your library web site.

My wish list for the locator would include being able to sort the results by date or distance, because when you get more than 20 results, you have to wade through them page by page.  In addition, it would be excellent to display all the results of your search on a Google map… and since they already link their individual results to Google maps, this would be fairly easy to add on.  

found via ResourceShelf

There is a bill being voted upon by the U.S. Senate on October 15th which will potentially open up a great deal of research being done with National Institute of Health (NIH) funding.  The bill will mandate that the public (as well as other researchers) have access to research funded through grants by the NIH.  Similar language has already passed a House vote in a budget bill, and so if this is approved in the Senate it is likely to become law.

The ALA has an easy to use site to allow people to send e-mails to their senators (just enter your zip code), and Digital Scholarship has some well-phrased suggestions for the text.  I did my own summary, after reading through the above pages.  Use if you like, but think about how you could state it in your own words, as well:

Dear Senator xxxxx:

As a library staff member, a blogger, and a U.S. citizen, I feel strongly that government sponsored research should be as open and available for everyone’s benefit as possible. This will lead to greater understanding of health issues, and will assist in focusing research more effectively in the future, which will save time, money, and lives. Open Access is the most effective way to do this with the NIH research.

For further information, the resources and talking points at http://www.digital-scholarship.org/other/nihtext.htm contain a great deal of merit. Also, Peter Suber’s website has excellent information: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm

Thank you for your consideration on this important topic.
 
Sincerely,
Rick Mason
xxx-xxx-xxxx
Library Support Staff blog
http://blog.librarysupportstaff.org/

Oncology by OncologyStat is an experiement by Elsevier to see if they can provide access to scholarly journals for free using an ad-based revenue formula.  In addition, they offer many resources for medical staff, patients, and families.

The press release stresses that their target audience is “US oncologists, hematologists, oncology nurses, and all other healthcare professionals involved in the treatment, care and diagnosis of patients with cancer”, but when you go through the registration process it is clear that students, Librarians, and even the general public are able to avail themselves of this service.

If your library serves those who need current scholarly information for oncology, you have another good resource to add to your collection!

found on Open Access News

A couple of months ago I wrote a post about the publishing company Reed Elsevier and their involvement in the world arms trade. Editors and writers from several of their journals, including The Lancet, were arguing that it was unethical to publish medical journals, then assist those selling arms and munitions worldwide.

The arguments seem to have won over, as Reed Elsevier announced yesterday that they will phase out their involvement by the end of this year. The Lancet’s response is here.

Kudos to all involved with the effort, including the editors, authors, press, and bloggers who presented their case, and those at Elsevier who examined the situation and made the right ethical choice.

from Open Access News

Open Medicine is a new journal from Canada which is striving to be an online, open access alternative to the likes of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). 

There have been many new open access journals in the past couple of years (see the Directory of Open Access Journals for an idea of what is available), but this is one we should keep an eye on, because JAMA and NEJM are such high profile publications.

from Open Access News  

Reed Elsevier, the European publishing corporation behind over 15,000 journals, is being challenged by one of them, The Lancet, in regards to its commercial involvement in the arms trade.

This connects to libraries in several ways: subscriptions to many print journals, as well as online access, are purchased by libraries, meaning we help to support the company’s activities; until recently, Elsevier was the owner of Endeavor (Pdf), the creator of the Voyager ILS; and in a broader sense, a company involved in both the trade of arms and the publishing of medical journals faces certain contradictions, which eventually raises questions about the quality of information that we provide from their journals.

It is important that we understand the details of this issue, and that we can understand the ways in which this can affect people and institutions. Individually we may not be able to do much, but our collective understanding, attitude, and action will make more of a difference in the world than we may realize.

Sources:

• Open Access News
• Lancet correspondence on the arms trade issue (Pdf)
• Guardian (UK) newspaper article
• Forbes magazine (AP) article

PubReMiner is an interesting tool that lets you see the metadata behind your PubMed search, and lets you narrow your search with quite a bit more understanding of the ways in which you can do so.

This was included as part of a list on Journalology

The open coursework offered by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health has been translated into Chinese and made available for study in China.

The effort was headed by Lucifer Chu (perhaps best known for translating The Lord of the Rings into Chinese) using a program called Opensource Opencourseware Prototype System (OOPS).  This signals an internationalization of open access, with many potential benefits for teaching and learning.

An excellent article about the work done by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), including how they worked with their libraries on the project, can be found here.

from Open Access News

The National Library of Medicine has a unique feature on their online file conversion site, DocMorph:  one of their options is to convert a file to synthesized speech.

Think about the option of providing your online materials in an audio format, without having to take the time to read and record them.  Meeting minutes, bulletins, newsletters could all be available as audio files.  Not a bad idea!

from ResourceShelf