Filtering by
- Member of: Pardon, Kevin
- Member of: Master of Healthcare Innovation Capstone Collection
- Member of: Applying the Sustainable Development Goals to Businesses
Working toward changing the language and leadership of healthcare to improve patient responsibility and decrease preventable disease.
The value of the RNS4PTS website is to provide transparency by supplying information that those who work in the medical field have to those who do not.
Vision Statement: Our patients deserve the best continuity of care possible. With that said, our nurses should effectively communicate patient information with our physicians in order to ensure the best treatment for acute condition changes in order to prevent hospital readmissions.
This presentation explains the role of skilled nursing facilities in the reduction of hospital readmissions.
"In attempts to reduce nosocomial infections, the focus of PPE is shifted to include patient protection.
This innovation project will help lead the healthcare organization to better health deliver and better service because it will prevent transmission of nosocomial infections between patients via hospital staff. Patients with HAI’s tend to have a longer duration hospital stay as well as more costs. Likewise, current healthcare reform restricts reimbursements for treatments associated with nosocomial infections. By minimizing these costly infections, the healthcare organization will be able to realize a greater profit."
Sequencing library modules over the course of multiple semesters allowed students to build upon core knowledge that is necessary to successfully complete increasingly advanced assignments and gain research skills that can be applied in their future careers as nurses.
Background & Objective:
Over the past several decades, systematic reviews have become a major part of the biomedical research literature landscape. While systematic reviews were originally developed for medicine and its related fields, they are now published in other disciplines. Our initial goal was to broadly investigate and describe the non-health sciences subject areas and disciplines that are publishing systematic reviews. Specifically, our research questions were,“What disciplines outside of the health sciences are adopting systematic reviews as a research method?” and “What implications may this have for health sciences librarianship?” Based on our initial findings, we will propose avenues for future research.
Methods & Discussion:
We conducted a search in the Scopus database to serve as a representative sample of the research literature. We searched for the phrase “systematic review*” in the article title or abstract, and limited the results to review articles from journals. We filtered out articles published in health sciences disciplines using the Scopus subject categories, and examined the articles that remained. The resulting set of titles was screened by two independent reviewers in a stepwise fashion. First we read the titles, then the abstracts, then the full text of remaining articles to determine if each was a systematic review and addressed a topic outside of the health sciences. We reconciled any differences for citations on which there was not initial consensus between reviewers. Lastly, we examined each remaining article to categorize its subject area or discipline. Our initial search included a number of systematic reviews outside the health science disciplines, and will yield data that has implications for librarians in the health sciences and in disciplines outside the health sciences field.
Objective: to explore currently available Open Educational Resources related to Health Sciences programs to increase available options for free, high quality, online educational materials to support Health Sciences faculty, researchers, and students in online, hybrid, and in-person courses at Arizona State University.
Background/Methods: Following the successful Open Access movement, the Open Education movement is expanding free, online access to Open Educational Resources (OERs), beyond research published in scholarly journals. Similar to the Open Access movement, Open Educational resources are of high quality, available for free, online, with minimal or no licensing restrictions. They include, but are not limited to: syllabi and course modules, open textbooks, and massive open online courses (MOOCs). Arizona State University (ASU) has many fully online degree programs from undergraduate to graduate level, as well as supplemental and continuing education certificates. ASU also has many hybrid programs and in-person courses that include online components. Instructors are often searching for online videos or other high quality, online educational materials that they can incorporate in their courses. OERs may provide some useful options. ASU Libraries became involved in Open Education Week in March 2013. To expand on our involvement and increase resource options at ASU, the presenters decided to begin identifying useful OERs for health sciences. To do so, the presenters searched for and evaluated 2-3 sources for OERs each and noted the advantages and/or disadvantages of each, as well as any highly useful specific OERs.
Results: The presenters will discuss the advantages and/or disadvantages of evaluated sources for Open Educational Resources and any highly useful specific OERs identified. We will also provide a brief overview of open source tools related to citation management.
Conclusion: Come to this presentation to explore the Open Education movement: hear about one research university library system's start with Open Education Week, and get an overview of free, online options for high quality Open Educational Resources in the Health Sciences.
Originally developed for medicine and related fields in support of evidence-based practice, systematic reviews (SRs) are now published in other fields. We investigated non-health sciences disciplines that are publishing systematic reviews.
Research questions:
“What disciplines outside the health sciences are adopting systematic reviews?”
“How do systematic reviews outside the health sciences compare with health sciences systematic reviews?”
Methods:
We conducted a search in the Scopus database for articles with the phrase “systematic review*” in the title or abstract. We limited our results to review articles, and eliminated health science focused articles using the Scopus Subject area categories. Articles were examined by reviewers to determine if they a) were classified as SRs by the authors b) exhibited accepted characteristics of systematic reviews, such as a comprehensive search, adherence to a predetermined protocol, and assessment of bias and quality, and c) addressed a non-health sciences topic. We eliminated articles based on 1) title, 2) abstract, and finally 3) the full text of each article. We reconciled differences for articles on which there was not initial consensus, and grouped remaining articles according to Scopus subject areas.
Discussion:
We found a significant number of systematic reviews outside the health science disciplines, particularly in the physical and social sciences. We compared similarities as well as differences to the protocols and processes used in health sciences systematic reviews. These findings have implications for librarians both inside and outside the health sciences arena who participate in systematic review projects.