LIS Research Research Articles

Professional avatars: librarians and educators in virtual worlds

PurposeThis study aims to examine librarianship and education in virtual world settings, focusing particularly on how librarians and educators establish professional identity and trust while teaching and providing information services as avatars within Second Life.Design/methodology/approachData was gathered through semi‐structured in‐depth interviews with 12 librarians and educators within the virtual world of Second Life, and in visits to 50 virtual world workplaces.FindingsLibrarians and educators faced challenges of establishing professional identity and credibility for two different audiences – i.e. “newbies” and “residents” – within the “game‐like” virtual world environment. Visual elements such as a conservative, humanoid avatar appearance, and imagery drawn from traditional workplaces were used by librarians and educators to establish their professional role with “newbies”, while for “residents” an upgraded avatar appearance was necessary to convey credibility.Practical implicationsFor librarians and educators working within highly visual, graphical online settings such as virtual worlds, this study describes issues in providing avatar‐mediated online distance education and online library services.Originality/valueThis research provides in‐depth interviews and observations with librarians and educators from a variety of libraries and educational settings. The study also explores avatar‐mediated communication, which is little‐examined as yet in LIS research.

Climbing the Hill

Climbing the Hill

Pakistan Journal of Library and Information Science: A bibliometric analysis

Pakistan Journal of Library and Information Science (PJLIS) is an HEC recognized journal published by the Department of Library and Information Science, University of the Punjab, Lahore. A total of 111 publications from 11 issues of PJLIS were published during 1995 to 2010. It has outstanding contribution in the dissemination of LIS research on national and international level as it publishes both in print and electronic format. A bibliometric analysis of contributions published in the PJLIS from 1995 to 2010 has been presented in this paper. Attempt has been made to study all 11 issues of this journal on the basis of different parameters, viz., author productivity, extent of authors' collaboration, authors' institutional affiliation, authors' geographic affiliation, type of publication, language of papers, number of citations used per article, length of papers, and year-wise distribution of papers.

The use and awareness of Web 2.0 tools by Greek LIS students

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to investigate the use of Web 2.0 tools and their use by Greek library science and information systems (LSIS) students; to study to what extent students use these tools both in everyday life and in relation to their studies.Design/methodology/approachA web‐based questionnaire was distributed to students of the LSIS Department at the Alexander Technological Educational Institute of Thessaloniki, Greece; 240 (25.5 per cent) students of a total population of 958 responded. The paper presents students' knowledge concerning Web 2.0 tools, their use and understanding of such tools, and to draw conclusions regarding the penetration of such tools into their everyday life.FindingsThe research found that although most of the students have heard of the term Web 2.0 and its tools, further knowledge of the subject is limited. This lack of knowledge was apparent in the poor ways that students exploited Web 2.0 features. The questionnaire, which was divided into two sections, examined the knowledge and use of Web 2.0 tools by students, and further explored the use of Web 2.0 tools in the educational process. It is hoped that the results of this study will provide insightful information to the Greek LIS community in order to better understand students' behaviour, with a view to encouraging the incorporation of new elements into the curriculum with regard to Web 2.0.Practical implicationsThe research suggests that the knowledge and implementation of Web 2.0 should begin in the LIS schools to prepare future library staff for the new challenges ahead. The Greek LIS research community has so far largely overlooked students' use of Web 2.0Originality/valueThe paper highlights that Web 2.0 is playing a leading role in library science.

문헌정보학 전문가를 위한 인도의 기술개발 프로그램과 활동 분석

IT의 융합과 함께 시작된 새로운 천년을 맞이하면서 도서관 전문직은 새로운 변화에 적응하기 위해 지속적으로 기술개발과 평생학습을 위한 노력을 해야 하는 상황에 직면하고 있다. 이 논문은 인도의 도서관계에서 이러한 상황에서 실무와 교육을 위한 전문지식과 기술을 지속적으로 새로이 하기 위해 마련하고 있는 최신의 프로그램과 활동들을 분석하였다. 특히 이 논문에서는 인도가 가지고 있는 조직적인 인프라와 문헌정보학의 교육과 연구, 실무에 응용할 수 있는 새로운 분야들에 대해 집중적으로 살펴보았다. 이러한 프로그램과 이를 통해 얻은 잠재적인 능력들은 인도는 물론 서아시아를 포함한 인근국가의 프로그램개발과 인프라구축, 나아가서는 인력개발을 위한 협력에도 도움이 될 것이다. The new millennium with mystifying convergence of IT has opened new challenges to LIS profession. This has resulted to continuous skill development and lifelong learning, for capacity building in consonant with contemporary changes. The LIS profession in India has created several mechanisms to organize and conduct several skills development programmes through which professionals are continuously enabled to update their professional knowledge and skills, in practice and teaching. There is a good organizational infrastructure and identified areas related to the recent developmental trends and as such LIS professionals and educators have facilities for updating their knowledge at veritable levels and intervals. The paper has surveyed programmes conducted by different organizations at different levels and highlights the aspects of the organizational infrastructure and the emergent areas of applications in LIS teaching, research and professional practices in India. The selection of areas and subjects for various skill development programmes suggest the competencies acquired by the LIS professionals from India, and the empowerment of their professional knowledge can be of immense value to its neighbouring countries. The paper highlights the knowledge and competencies of the LIS professionals in India and the broad-based facilities available here which can be a model for those countries which are seeking to utilize the LIS human resources from this part of the sub-continent. The paper in this circumstance surveyed on the institutional infrastructure for skill developmental opportunities available in India which would meet such requirements within and to the countries outside in the South Asian region seeking its collaboration in such manpower development work.

While Collaboration Is Increasing in the Profession the LIS Dissertation Remains a Solo-Authored Monograph

Objective – To investigate collaboration in LIS doctoral education, in particular the extent and perception of collaboration between advisors and advisees, and the dissertation as a collaborative product.
 
 Design – Quantitative and qualitative analysis of questionnaire data. Qualitative analysis of interviews. Bibliometric analysis of curricula vitae (CVs) and dissertation citations. 
 
 Setting – American Library Association (ALA)-accredited, doctorate-granting schools in the United States and Canada.
 
 Subjects – A total of 374 full-time, tenured faculty members with the rank of associate or full professor (advisor group) and 294 assistant professors (advisee group) comprised the pool of faculty members (n=668) who were sent the questionnaire. Of these, 30 individuals participated in follow-up telephone interviews, which were equally split between the two groups. There were 97 faculty members from the original pool of 668 faculty members were included in the bibliometric analyses.
 
 Methods – The author developed two questionnaires, one for the advisors (associate and full professors) and one for the advisees (assistant professors), and sent the surveys to faculty members at ALA-accredited schools in the United States and Canada. The questionnaires gathered information about the extent of collaboration and perceptions of collaboration in LIS doctoral education. The author also collected contact information from those interested in participating in a follow-up interview. The author selected the first 30 individuals who responded as the interview participants. The interview participants were split equally between advisors and advisees. 
 
 A separate subpopulation of 97 faculty members was chosen for the bibliometric analysis phase of the study. These faculty members were chosen with the following criteria: graduation from an ALA-accredited school; full-text of dissertation available online; and a current, full CV available online. CVs were searched to determine the level of co-authoring before and after graduation.
 
 Main Results – A total of 215 faculty members completed the questionnaires. The results from the surveys showed that more than 61% of the advisors reported collaborating with at least half of their advisees, while 58% of the advisees reported collaborating with their advisors. Both advisors and advisees defined collaboration mainly as publishing, researching, and presenting together. More than 50% of the advisors reported co-publishing with half of their advisees during the advisees’ doctoral education. The advisors reported co-publishing with less than 30% of their advisees after the students completed their doctoral education. Advisees reported similar numbers: 44% and 31%, respectively. 
 
 Following graduation, the majority of advisees (96%) planned to publish from their dissertations. Of these, 78% did not plan to include their advisor as co-author in these publications. 42% of the advisors reported that none of their advisees included them as co-authors, while 3% of advisors stated that their advisees always included them as co-authors. 
 
 After the 30 interview transcripts were coded using inductive and deductive approaches, the results showed that advisees saw research as a process whereby they became collaborators with their advisors. Advisees also found collaboration with other doctoral students as “kind of key” (p. 7). Advisors saw collaboration as a form of mentorship. However, both advisees and advisors reported that the dissertation itself was not a collaborative product, with the responsibilities of the dissertation tasks falling more heavily on the advisees than the advisors, except in the realm of reviewing and approving the final version of the dissertation. 
 
 Analysis of the CVs for co-publishing between advisees and their advisor and/or committee members showed that 41% of the advisees published with their advisors and 34% published with at least one committee member before receiving their doctorate. After receiving their doctorates, 31% of the advisees published with their advisors and 32% published with a committee member. 
 
 Conclusion – The author concluded that a majority of advisors and advisees see collaboration as joint publication during the period of doctoral studies. Both advisors and advisees see the doctoral dissertation as a solo-authored monograph and not a collaborative product. However, other forms of collaboration among advisees and their advisors, committee members, and fellow doctoral students are viewed as important parts of the doctoral education experience. Based on these findings, the author suggests that the profession may need to adapt its model of doctoral education to become more aligned with the increasingly collaborative nature of LIS research.

EditorialEvidence based library and information practice

Whilst many of us engage in supporting clinicians in identifying, appraising and using evidence, how many of us adopt the same approach to our own work? A recent survey by the UK LIS Research Coalition indicated that 60% of respondents use research reports as a source of information whilst a similar proportion of health library respondents use professional events such as conferences as a source of information. This summer sees the 6(th) International Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP6) being held at the University of Salford, UK between 27(th) -30(th) June which will go some way to satisfying this latter information need whilst the Health Information and Libraries Journal can help satisfy the need for research reports. Whatever you're doing this summer, let's make it evidence based.

Writing it Up: Getting Your LIS Research Out There

This paper grew out of a presentation at the ‘Research for LIS Practitioners Workshop’ organised by the ALIA Research Committees and held at the State Library of New South Wales. The workshop was a satellite event of the Information Online Conference. The goal of the workshop was to encourage practitioner research and publication in the LIS community and the goal of this paper is, (in common with the presentation it grew from), to assist beginning LIS practitioner researchers by providing introductory information and tips about how to write up research for dissemination and publication. Basic information is provided about the components of a research report, and the different approaches required for different audiences and types of publication. In addition, some personal observations about the practicalities of writing are provided. This paper provides practitioner researchers with a starting point for writing up their research.

A Citation Analysis of Western Journals Cited in Taiwan's Library and Information Science and History Research Journals: From a Research Evaluation Perspective

ABSTRACT This article examines citations of Western journals in eight LIS journals and six history journals published in Taiwan. The findings show that both the Western journals' impact factor values and whether they are included in JCR may not necessarily indicate their real use in Taiwan's LIS and history research—especially in history research.

Australian PhDs by LIS educators, researchers and practitioners: Depicting diversity and demise

Analyses of more than 73,000 PhD thesis records in a comprehensive database of bibliographic records from all Australian universities from 1948 to 2006 demonstrate that PhDs on LIS-related topics reveal not only diversity of content, but also the diverse nature of the researcher's academic disciplines. This diversity includes researchers from within and outside LIS who bring to LIS–or take away–a variety of methods, approaches, theories and understandings. With 27 of Australia's 39 universities having produced LIS-related PhD graduates, the distribution through the Australian university system is evident and emphasizes the transferability of skills and knowledge which graduates bring to their work. It is possible that the diversity of researcher's disciplines, combined with the dangerously low numbers of LIS graduations, may also threaten the future of LIS research and education in Australia. Based on the findings of this study, the sustainability of LIS research and research training for the next generation in Australia is under threat.

Research and practice in IA

What is the current relationship of research and practice in information architecture? That was the question posed in a “back of a napkin” collective-thinking exercise introduced by Keith Instone and Andrea Resmini Andrea Resmini in “Bridging IA Research and Practice,” a session they co-hosted at the 11th ASIS&T IA Summit in Phoenix, Arizona. For additional ideas from participants, please see the list and description of other “napkin sketches” at the end of the article.

Can information ethics be conceptualized by using the core/periphery model?

The term ‘information ethics’ (IE) is rapidly diversifying as new technologies enter the milieu and add to already existing ‘entanglements’. Unsurprisingly, the term lacks a universally accepted definition, although there is some common ground as to its constitution. This paper explores the term using the most commonly co-occurring terms in IE literature as indexed in nine databases, namely the EBSCO-hosted Academic Search Premier (ASP); Communication and Mass Media Complete; ERIC; Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (LISTA); Newspaper Complete; Business Premier; and Master File Premier, and Wilson's Library Literature and Information Science (LLIS) Full Text. Core/periphery analysis, the co-occurrence of words as subject terms, and social network techniques were applied using UCINET for Windows, text STAT and Bibexcel computer-aided software to analyze data. The paper identifies the most common terms used to describe IE and the core terms with which IE can be defined. Other than informing LIS research and education, the results could potentially assist with the development of IE taxonomy and definitions (e.g. in understanding IE content and development) that may apply to the intercultural and global understanding of IE.

Library and information science practitioners writing for publication: motivations, barriers and supports

Few research studies have investigated UK LIS practitioners' motivation for publication, the barriers they perceive and which supports they think would help, and there is a particular lack of research on publication by practitioners who do not work in academic libraries. This investigation drew evidence from - a small scale quantitative survey to assess variation in the extent of practitioner publishing in 12 LIS publications, including peer reviewed journals and practitioner magazines,
 -an online survey of self-perceived motivations, barriers, and writing support wishes, undertaken by 100 LIS practitioners in September 2009. 
 Key motivations included sharing ideas, professional development and raising the personal profile. Lack of time was the most reported barrier to participation, while protected time to write, peer encouragement and organisational support via appraisal objectives were most commonly requested supports. The findings will be of interest to those who wish to participate in or promote LIS practitioner publishing and research.

Diversity, Inclusion, and Underrepresented Populations in LIS Research

Previous articleNext article No AccessResearch in PracticeDiversity, Inclusion, and Underrepresented Populations in LIS ResearchPaul T. Jaeger, John Carlo Bertot, and Renee E. FranklinPaul T. Jaeger1. Assistant professor and director of the Center for Information Policy and Electronic Government, College of Information Studies, University of Maryland. Search for more articles by this author , John Carlo Bertot Search for more articles by this author , and Renee E. Franklin3. Assistant professor, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University. Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Library Quarterly Volume 80, Number 2April 2010 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/651053 Views: 688Total views on this site Citations: 22Citations are reported from Crossref © 2010 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Raj Kumar Bhardwaj Information system for visually impaired in Indian universities: a user’s perspectives, Information Discovery and Delivery 50, no.33 (Oct 2021): 312–325.https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-05-2021-0053Xiaoai Ren, Nicole D. Alemanne, Lenese M. Colson How MLIS Programs Prepare Students to Serve Diverse Populations: The North American Context, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 63, no.33 (May 2022): 301–320.https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2021-0021Muhammad Asim Qayyum, Mohamed Taher How LAM Sector Can Improve Quality of Life for Underserved Groups via a Whole Person Approach, (Jan 2022): 283–294.https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8363-0.ch015Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Tae Hee Lee, Shengang Wang, Hyun Seung Lee Coping tactics of blind and visually impaired users: Responding to help-seeking situations in the digital library environment, Information Processing & Management 58, no.55 (Sep 2021): 102612.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102612Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Hyun Seung Lee, Shengang Wang, Tae Hee Lee Orientation tactics and associated factors in the digital library environment: Comparison between blind and sighted users, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 72, no.88 (Mar 2021): 995–1010.https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24469Alex H. Poole, Denise Agosto, Jane Greenberg, Xia Lin, Erjia Yan Where Do We Stand? Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in North American Library and Information Science Education, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 62, no.33 (Jul 2021): 258–286.https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis.2020-0018Jodie Boyd, Ian McShane The ‘Difficult Balance Between Equity and Differentiation’: Developing a Transformative Praxis, Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association 70, no.11 (Mar 2021): 3–20.https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2021.1880357Rebecca Muir, Kim M. Thompson, Asim Qayyum The Diversity We Seek: A Document Analysis of Diversity and Inclusion in the Australian Library and Information Sector Job Advertisements, Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association 69, no.44 (Oct 2020): 473–495.https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2020.1812023Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Tae Hee Lee, Melissa Davey Castillo, Sukjin You, Ann M Hanlon Enhancing usability of digital libraries: Designing help features to support blind and visually impaired users, Information Processing & Management 57, no.33 (May 2020): 102110.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102110Marta Bladek Latino students and the academic library: A primer for action, The Journal of Academic Librarianship 45, no.11 (Jan 2019): 50–57.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.12.001Jonas Söderholm Tool lending librarianship, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 50, no.44 (Sep 2016): 374–385.https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616666627Keren DaliNadia Caidi Diversity by Design, The Library Quarterly 87, no.22 (Mar 2017): 88–98.https://doi.org/10.1086/690735Hui-Yun Sung, Paul Parboteeah Diversity-related research reported in high-impact library and information science journal literature: A content analysis, Library & Information Science Research 39, no.22 (Apr 2017): 77–84.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.03.002Paul T. Jaeger, Diane L. Barlow, Beth St. Jean The Arc of Activism: The James Partridge Award in the Context of 50 Years of Attempts to Influence Diversity and Inclusion in the Field of Library and Information Science by the University of Maryland, (Dec 2016): 21–32.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000042003Paul T. Jaeger, Renee F. Hill The Long Walk: Diversity in Information Studies Educational Programs, Professions, and Institutions, (Dec 2016): 209–215.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000042020Fiona Jardine The Role of Students in Diversity and Inclusion in Library and Information Science, (Feb 2016): 399–416.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000041016Nadia Caidi, Keren Dali Can we talk?, New Library World 116, no.11/1211/12 (Nov 2015): 748–780.https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-08-2015-0056Paul T. JaegerLindsay C. SarinKaitlin J. Peterson Diversity, Inclusion, and Library and Information Science: An Ongoing Imperative (or Why We Still Desperately Need to Have Discussions about Diversity and Inclusion), The Library Quarterly 85, no.22 (Oct 2015): 127–132.https://doi.org/10.1086/680151Paul T. JaegerJohn Carlo BertotMega Subramaniam Preparing Future Librarians to Effectively Serve Their Communities, The Library Quarterly 83, no.33 (Jul 2015): 243–248.https://doi.org/10.1086/670699Mega M. Subramaniam, Howard Rodriguez-Mori, Paul T. Jaeger, and Renee Franklin Hill The Implications of a Decade of Diversity-Related Doctoral Dissertations (2000–2009) in LIS: Supporting Inclusive Library Practices, The Library Quarterly 82, no.33 (Jul 2015): 361–377.https://doi.org/10.1086/665931David Baker, Wendy Evans Libraries, society and social responsibility, (Jan 2011): 1–16.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-84334-131-4.50001-7Charlotte L. V. Thoms, Sharon L. Burton Understanding the Impact of Inclusion in Disability Studies Education, (): 186–213.https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-7324-3.ch008

Assessing Asian Scholarly Research in Library and Information Science: A Quantitative View As Reflected in Web of Knowledge

This paper highlights the quantitative performance of scholarly LIS research in Asian countries based on articles published during 2001–2007 in journals indexed by the Social Science Citation Index of Web of Knowledge. The quantitative performance of Asian countries has been judged and compared on the basis of various quantitative indicators: (a) size of scientific activity measured by volume of production in various types of publications during the period of study, (b) authorship pattern and collaboration of scientific activity measured by co-authorship and the amount of national and international collaboration, (c) the pattern of citations measured by counting the cited and citing references of published articles, and (d) a newly developed metrics-research performance.The results show that during the last seven years, the publication rate has increased twofold and, among the Asian countries, the authors of the People's Republic of China contributed the greatest number of articles, followed by Taiwan and South Korea. There is also an increasing trend toward collaborative research among Asian authors, with most of the collaboration occurring either among authors from the same country or with authors of non-Asian origin. The research performance analysis indicates that articles written by authors from South Korea received the highest number of citations, followed by Taiwan. Although the quantity of articles published by authors of Taiwan and South Korea is higher than Singapore and Israel, the articles contributed by authors from these latter two blocks appear in higher-impact journals.These findings show the increasing contribution made by Asian scholars to the international LIS literature, and the quality of that research.

La información para la empresa y el sistema de i+d+i. el caso de la región valenciana

Not only has the field of corporate information management been almost entirely neglected in Spain's LIS curricula and had hardly any echo in its LIS research, but there is widespread unawareness of the job opportunities that it represents. Nonetheless, the acceptance by the business and economics world of information as a resource of prime importance has led to the emergence of the discipline of Competitive Intelligence aimed at resolving the problems of information, and reducing the uncertainty that companies often find themselves surrounded by. After a brief description of the Spanish system of Science, Technology and Society, and of the corporate structure and enterprise culture of Valencia, the work focuses on two of the axes of the R & D & I support system of the Valencia Autonomous Community through its information systems for companies: the Regional agency for the promotion of innovation, Impiva, and the Region's network of technology centres. These structures are seen to provide support for the decision-making process on issues that affect many different corporate departments.

QQML 2009 International Conference: “Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries”

PurposeThis review reports on the first Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries International Conference held in Chania, Crete, Greece.Design/methodology/approachThe methodological approach is anthropological participant observation.FindingsApproximately 150 attendees from 50 different countries participated and exchanged ideas, methodologies, and techniques related to library research.Practical implicationsPresentation of research related to various types of libraries is a way to disseminate research results as well as promote and stimulate further research.Originality/valueThere is a need to expand the body of both qualitative and quantitative LIS research related to library research, particularly the evaluation of library services.

LIS research in the United Kingdom

This article discusses the development of academic research in the LIS domain and the purpose of LIS research. It is argued that there are several constituent parts of the research tradition, both theoretical and empirical, and that this has created tensions and misunderstandings between researchers and practitioners. Against this background, the impact of the Research Assessment Exercises since 1988, and especially the implications of the outcome of RAE 2008, are analysed and discussed. Sources of funding, and the roles of various stakeholder bodies in the research process, are also discussed. It is concluded that in the UK, LIS research has been absorbed into the mainstream of academic research, but that it is still producing outputs which are transferable into the sphere of professional practice.

Forty years of the Journal of Librarianship and Information Science: A quantitative analysis, Part I

This paper reports on the first part of a two-part quantitative analysis of volume 1—40 (1969—2008) of the Journal of Librarianship and Information Science (formerly the Journal of Librarianship). It provides an overview of the current state of LIS research journal publishing in the UK; a review of the publication and printing history of JoL/ JOLIS, and of published descriptions and evaluations of its purpose and scope; and a summary of some results of the quantitative analysis, focusing on data of the kind that may be collected by directly examining the published issues of the journal itself. These results are informative in various ways about editors, document types, authors, authors’ institutions, and authors’ countries. A supplementary analysis of citations to and from the journal will be reported at a later date.

LIS researchers and practitioners: creating a research culture

The LIS research landscape: a review and prognosis, was a short research project initiated in response to a request from the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP). The overall aim of the project was to review LIS domain research over the past five years (1997-2002) and to make a prognosis for research over the next three years (2002-2005). This exercise identified a number of issues of concern to those involved in research in the LIS domain. One of the most interesting recurring themes to emerge was the need to ensure that research is disseminated effectively within and beyond the LIS domain and to provide mechanisms to allow findings to feed into practice. This article describes the issues surrounding this strand of the review.