Tag Archives: systematic review

Journal Club – The Application of Internet-Based Sources for Public Health Surveillance (Infoveillance): Systematic Review

Posted on by

Meeting Date: September 21, 2020

Presenter: Mark Mueller

Article: Barros JM, Duggan J, Rebholz-Schuhmann D. The Application of Internet-Based Sources for Public Health Surveillance (Infoveillance): Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res 2020;22(3):e13680 https://www.jmir.org/2020/3/e13680/

Questions:

1) What do the authors mean by infodemiology or infoveillance? What does this look like in practice?

• Science of distribution and determinents of information, particularly the internet to inform public health and public policy
• Sharing and searching information
• Scientists using it predict the spread of COVID-19 previously
• Sources used to extract data: social; discussion forums; mobile apps (i.e. COVID-19 tracker app); other sources search queries; news articles; websites; media monitoring systems; web encyclopaedias; online obituaries

2) What is the potential value in using Internet-Based-Resources to study the course of a disease or an outbreak?

• Real-time data and discern health-related concerns; and developed responses
• No infrastructure to obscure information. Less barriers. More representative of various population groups and country-specific phenomenon
• Accelerate resolutions (i.e. treatments, economic resolutions, resource sharing, etc.)
• Insights into how disease is affecting and/or being discussed
• Topic analyses
• Can be used to monitor what information is being shared and when

3) What are the potential limitations in using Internet-Based Resources to study the course of a disease or an outbreak?

• Difficulty accessing the internet (particularly in developing countries) – data may not be complete and knowledge gaps
• Potential that information could be fabricated (misinformation)
• Bots/trolls may make false information/claims
• Information could be lost in translation – semantics could be lost
• Misinformation being shared, Google trends does not provide demographic data

4) Do you think it might be possible to work this research approach into our daily workflow as librarians; particularly for those of us who might be part of a COVID-19 response effort? If so, why? If not, why not?

• Create infographics
• Can detect where the misinformation is coming from – address the misinformation at the point-of-need

5) Could this research approach be applied to other contexts and/or topics related to library work? Example: monitoring other topics within the medical/healthcare community; combating fake news; etc.

• Community trends for topics that come up in the reference queue (i.e. health concerns, new courses)?
• To address misinformation would require professionalization in medicine, ethics, etc. that go beyond our scope

Chapter Update: Fall 2016 Meeting

Posted on by — No Comments ↓

During the morning portion of the session Brendalynn Ens (Director, Knowledge Mobilization and Liaison Program at Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health [CADTH]) lead 11 librarians and library technicians through the critical appraisal process of medical literature, including randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines. Thousands of critical appraisal tools (CATs) are available, but all are based on three basic questions: “Can I believe the results?”; “What are the results?”; and “Will the results help me in my decision making?” CADTH has created a set of four (non-validated) CATs available for use (Registered Controlled Trials, Systematic Reviews, Clinical Practical Guidelines, and Qualitative Research), which they distributed to the attendees. Brendalynn spoke in depth specifically about bias in Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), which includes five different types of bias associated with CPGs: financial, publication, conflict of interest, expert influence, and external commercial bias. She also shared her five-minute shortcut to critical appraisal of a CPG.

critical-appraisal

The afternoon portion of the meeting began with Valerie Moore, who provided the attendees with a tour of the new SHIRP website at their new URL: www.shirp.usask.ca

SHIRP’s new logo is featured on their website, along with a new “Quick Links” section, and the new LibGuides. In the last three months the website has seen 19255 visits, with the Pharmacist and Physician pages seeing the top hits. Drug databases are the most popular. There has been a lot of anecdotal positive feedback on the newly designed website.

shirp2

The afternoon continued with a pre-recorded video presentation from Catherine Boden entitled “Learning Needs Across the Continuum from Beginner to Expert: A Survey of Health Sciences Librarians Working in Canada and the U.S.” Catherine provided the group with some background on a project, which is a partnership between the University of Saskatchewan and the Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-Orientated Research (SCPOR), to develop, deliver and evaluate a series of online modules aimed at building skills in literature/information searching, and reviewing and synthesizing methodologies to support evidence-based practice for healthcare professionals across the province; and, to coordinate and present workshops on systematic reviews and meta-analysis across the province, delivered by nationally recognized experts. As background piece to this project, Catherine undertook an assessment on the learning needs of librarians supporting systematic reviews using a questionnaire, which was distributed to health sciences librarian working in North America. The results of the questionnaire were shared, which included questions on demographics, systematic review experience, “design your own Continuing Education,” and facilitators and challenges.

The day ended with the SHLA general meeting, which included reports from the executive, and a discussion led by Susan Murphy based on questions from Catherine Boden about training around systematic reviews.