Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGore, Sally A.
dc.contributor.authorNordberg, Judy M.
dc.contributor.authorPalmer, Lisa A.
dc.contributor.authorPiorun, Mary E
dc.date2022-08-11T08:09:16.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:24:15Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:24:15Z
dc.date.issued2009-07-01
dc.date.submitted2009-08-03
dc.identifier.citationJournal of the Medical Library Association, 2009 July; 97(3):203-211. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.3.009">Link to article on publisher's website</a>
dc.identifier.doi10.3163/1536-5050.97.3.009
dc.identifier.pmid19626146
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/36080
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: This study analyzed trends in research activity as represented in the published research in the leading peer-reviewed professional journal for health sciences librarianship. METHODOLOGY: Research articles were identified from the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association and Journal of the Medical Library Association (1991-2007). Using content analysis and bibliometric techniques, data were collected for each article on the (1) subject, (2) research method, (3) analytical technique used, (4) number of authors, (5) number of citations, (6) first author affiliation, and (7) funding source. The results were compared to a previous study, covering the period 1966 to 1990, to identify changes over time. RESULTS: Of the 930 articles examined, 474 (51%) were identified as research articles. Survey (n = 174, 37.1%) was the most common methodology employed, quantitative descriptive statistics (n = 298, 63.5%) the most used analytical technique, and applied topics (n = 332, 70%) the most common type of subject studied. The majority of first authors were associated with an academic health sciences library (n = 264, 55.7%). Only 27.4% (n = 130) of studies identified a funding source. CONCLUSION: This study's findings demonstrate that progress is being made in health sciences librarianship research. There is, however, room for improvement in terms of research methodologies used, proportion of applied versus theoretical research, and elimination of barriers to conducting research for practicing librarians.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=19626146&dopt=Abstract">Link to article in PubMed</a>
dc.rightsThis article was first published in Journal of the Medical Library Association, 2009 July; 97(3):203-211. Copyright is retained by the authors. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.3.009">Link to article on publisher's website</a>
dc.subjectLibraries, Medical; Library Science; Research; Publishing
dc.subjectLibrary and Information Science
dc.titleTrends in health sciences library and information science research: an analysis of research publications in the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association and Journal of the Medical Library Association from 1991 to 2007
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1107&amp;context=lib_articles&amp;unstamped=1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/lib_articles/102
dc.identifier.contextkey920292
refterms.dateFOA2022-08-23T16:24:15Z
atmire.contributor.authoremailsally.gore@umassmed.edu
atmire.contributor.authoremaillisa.palmer@umassmed.edu
atmire.contributor.authoremailmary.piorun@umassmed.edu
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed trends in research activity as represented in the published research in the leading peer-reviewed professional journal for health sciences librarianship.</p> <p>METHODOLOGY: Research articles were identified from the Bulletin of the Medical Library Association and Journal of the Medical Library Association (1991-2007). Using content analysis and bibliometric techniques, data were collected for each article on the (1) subject, (2) research method, (3) analytical technique used, (4) number of authors, (5) number of citations, (6) first author affiliation, and (7) funding source. The results were compared to a previous study, covering the period 1966 to 1990, to identify changes over time.</p> <p>RESULTS: Of the 930 articles examined, 474 (51%) were identified as research articles. Survey (n = 174, 37.1%) was the most common methodology employed, quantitative descriptive statistics (n = 298, 63.5%) the most used analytical technique, and applied topics (n = 332, 70%) the most common type of subject studied. The majority of first authors were associated with an academic health sciences library (n = 264, 55.7%). Only 27.4% (n = 130) of studies identified a funding source.</p> <p>CONCLUSION: This study's findings demonstrate that progress is being made in health sciences librarianship research. There is, however, room for improvement in terms of research methodologies used, proportion of applied versus theoretical research, and elimination of barriers to conducting research for practicing librarians.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathlib_articles/102


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
jmla_library_research_article_ ...
Size:
267.4Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record