Medical Library Association Members Research Articles

Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the Medical Library Association: a look back at the last twenty-five years.

Over the past twenty-five years, the Medical Library Association (MLA) has pursued a range of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This article, written by members of the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA)'s Equity Advisory Group (EAG), outlines significant measures taken to raise awareness about specific concepts, opportunities, and challenges related to DEI among MLA members. Topics discussed include the impact of influential Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) leaders, the establishment of DEI and social justice-focused membership communities, and specific initiatives led by various working groups and committees which have served to strengthen MLA's commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion during the last three decades.

Twenty-five years of Medical Library Association competencies and communities.

Professional associations provide resources to support members' career development and facilitate ways for members to engage with and learn from one another. This article describes Medical Library Association (MLA) activities related to the revision of professional competencies and the restructuring of the organization's communities during the past twenty-five years. Grounded in MLA's Platform for Change, the MLA competency statement underwent two revisions with core themes remaining consistent. Major efforts went into rethinking the structure of MLA communities, and it became a strategic goal of the association. Numerous groups spent considerable time guiding the changes in MLA's community structure. Sections and special interest groups were transformed into caucuses. Domain hubs were established to facilitate project coordination across caucuses and create more leadership opportunities for MLA members, but their implementation did not meet expectations. Member engagement and leadership are ongoing challenges for MLA. The next twenty-five years will undoubtedly see additional revisions to the competencies and continued iterations of the community structure.

Medical Library Association Diversity and Inclusion Task Force Report.

The Medical Library Association (MLA) appointed a Diversity and Inclusion Task Force (DITF) in 2017. Sandra G. Franklin, AHIP, FMLA, chaired the task force and guided initiatives. From 2017 to 2020, the task force completed a review of MLA defining documents—including the mission, vision, values, and code of ethics—resulting in language updates to these documents. As MLA transitioned through the communities process, the DITF contributed to the transition. Other recommended essential changes to MLA profiles to promote awareness included updating pronouns to promote gender inclusivity and suggestions for the Annual Meeting Innovation Task Force. DITF members actively brought diversity and inclusion programming and engagement to MLA members at annual meetings. The task force held a fish bowl conversation, an open forum, and a Diversity Dialogues roundtable discussion; provided interactive discussion boards; and designed an MLA diversity button. Beyond MLA annual meetings, the task force hosted two critical librarianship meetings and a Twitter chat to engage MLA members with diversity and inclusion topics. Task force members promoted diversity and inclusion beyond their task force appointments with presentations at chapter meetings and other non-DITF MLA annual meeting programming. A notable task force accomplishment included completing a survey of MLA members to gather baseline demographic characteristics, including never before collected data about disability, socioeconomics, and caregiver status. This report provides an overview of DITF activities from 2017 to 2020.

The Medical Library Association (MLA) voter: a survey of attitudes, perceptions, and voting practices in MLA national elections

Objective:Voting in professional associations is critical for selecting leaders who will implement a desirable vision for an association. Members of the Medical Library Association (MLA) were surveyed to assess their attitudes and perceptions of the voting process to elect the MLA national offices of president and members of the Board of Directors and Nominating Committee. Survey data were also used to test the hypothesis that committed MLA members are more likely to always vote.Methods:SurveyMonkey was used to deliver a 46-question survey to 2,671 email addresses of MLA members who were eligible to vote. Survey data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative approaches.Results:A total of 676 responses were received, resulting in a 25% response rate. Respondents indicated that the most desired qualities in candidates included experience in professional positions, contributions to MLA, and a vision for the association, whereas candidates' personal characteristics were rarely considered. Respondents expressed doubts about the use of a single slate, had positive views of campaigning but were doubtful about its impact, and were generally accepting of the current voting process. Committed MLA members were significantly more likely to always vote in MLA national elections.Conclusions:The survey results provide insight into understanding the concerns and motivations of MLA voters and add to the limited literature on professional association voting.

Coping with Impostor Feelings: Evidence Based Recommendations from a Mixed Methods Study

Abstract
 Objective – The negative effects of impostor phenomenon, also called impostor syndrome, include burnout and decreased job satisfaction and have led to an increased interest in addressing this issue in libraries in recent years. While previous research has shown that many librarians experience impostor phenomenon, the experience of coping with these feelings has not been widely studied. The aim of our study was to understand how health sciences librarians cope with impostor phenomenon in the workplace. 
 Methods – We conducted a census of 2125 Medical Library Association members between October and December 2017. An online survey featuring the Harvey Impostor Phenomenon scale and open-ended questions about coping strategies to address impostor phenomenon at work was administered to all eligible participants. We used thematic analysis to explore strategies for addressing impostor phenomenon and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to examine relationships between impostor phenomenon scores and coping strategies.
 Results – Among 703 survey respondents, 460 participants completed the qualitative portion of the survey (65%). We found that external coping strategies that drew on the help of another person or resource, such as education, support from colleagues, and mentorship, were associated with lower impostor scores and more often rated by participants as effective, while internal strategies like reflection, mindfulness, and recording praise were associated with less effectiveness and a greater likelihood of impostor feelings. Most respondents reported their strategies to be effective, and the use of any strategy appeared to be more effective than not using one at all.
 Conclusions – This study provides evidence based recommendations for librarians, library leaders, and professional organizations to raise awareness about impostor phenomenon and support our colleagues experiencing these feelings. We attempt to situate our recommendations within the context of potential barriers, such as white supremacy culture, the resilience narrative, and the lack of open communication in library organizations.

Building visualization skills through investigating the Journal of the Medical Library Association coauthorship network from 2006-2017.

ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to explore different dimensions of Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) authorship from 2006–2017. Dimensions that were evaluated using coauthorship networks and affiliation data included collaboration, geographical reach, and relationship between Medical Library Association (MLA) member and nonmember authors. A secondary objective was to analyze the practice and practical application of data science skills.MethodsA team of librarians who attended the 2017 Data Science and Visualization Institute used JMLA bibliographic metadata extracted from Scopus, together with select MLA membership data from 2006–2017. Data cleaning, anonymization, analysis, and visualization were done collaboratively by the team members to meet their learning objectives and to produce insights about the nature of collaborative authorship at JMLA.ResultsSixty-nine percent of the 1,351 JMLA authors from 2006–2017 were not MLA members. MLA members were more productive and collaborative, and tended to author articles together. The majority of the authoring institutions in JMLA are based in the United States. Global reach outside of the United States and Canada shows higher authorship in English-speaking countries (e.g., Australia, United Kingdom), as well as in Western Europe and Japan.ConclusionsMLA support of JMLA may benefit a wider network of health information specialists and medical professionals than is reflected in MLA membership. Conducting coauthorship network analyses can create opportunities for health sciences librarians to practice applying emerging data science and data visualization skills.

Point of Care Products in Health Science Classes

ABSTRACTPoint of Care products (POCs) provide health professionals with access to digital information on medications, diseases, and the recent research results. These products are searchable on tablets, smartphones, and computers. Most health science libraries provide access to at least one POC. A survey of 138 Medical Library Association members, however, shows that most librarians rarely mention or incorporate POCs into health science classes. In the Fall of 2017, after reviewing the results of a survey, librarians at the University of Toledo, incorporated POCs, patient cases, and group activities into classes taught to first-year medical students hoping to see changes in student practices.

Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes

Introduction: The extent to which health sciences librarians are engaged in research is a little-studied question. This study assesses the research activities and attitudes of Medical Library Association (MLA) members, including the influence of work affiliation.Methods: An online survey was designed using a combination of multiple-choice and open-ended questions and distributed to MLA members. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, content analysis, and significance testing. The authors used statistical tools and categorized openended question topics by the constant comparative method, also applying the broad subject categories used in a prior study. Pearson’s chi-square analysis was performed on responses to determine significant differences among respondents employed in three different institutional environments.Results: Analysis showed that 79% of respondents read research articles at least once a month; 58% applied published research studies to practice; 44% had conducted research; 62% reported acting on research had enhanced their libraries; 38% had presented findings; and 34% had authored research articles. Hospital librarians were significantly less likely than academic librarians to have participated in research activities. Highly ranked research benefits, barriers, and competencies of health sciences librarians are described.Conclusions: Findings indicate that health sciences librarians are actively engaged in research activities. Practice implications for practitioners, publishers, and stakeholders are discussed. Results suggest that practitioners can use published research results and results from their own research to affect practice decisions and improve services. Future studies are needed to confirm and extend these findings, including the need for intervention studies to increase research and writing productivity.

Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes.

The extent to which health sciences librarians are engaged in research is a little-studied question. This study assesses the research activities and attitudes of Medical Library Association (MLA) members, including the influence of work affiliation. An online survey was designed using a combination of multiple-choice and open-ended questions and distributed to MLA members. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, content analysis, and significance testing. The authors used statistical tools and categorized open-ended question topics by the constant comparative method, also applying the broad subject categories used in a prior study. Pearson's chi-square analysis was performed on responses to determine significant differences among respondents employed in three different institutional environments. Analysis showed that 79% of respondents read research articles at least once a month; 58% applied published research studies to practice; 44% had conducted research; 62% reported acting on research had enhanced their libraries; 38% had presented findings; and 34% had authored research articles. Hospital librarians were significantly less likely than academic librarians to have participated in research activities. Highly ranked research benefits, barriers, and competencies of health sciences librarians are described. Findings indicate that health sciences librarians are actively engaged in research activities. Practice implications for practitioners, publishers, and stakeholders are discussed. Results suggest that practitioners can use published research results and results from their own research to affect practice decisions and improve services. Future studies are needed to confirm and extend these findings, including the need for intervention studies to increase research and writing productivity.

Research survey suggests opportunities.

Six hundred twenty-four members of the Medical Library Association (MLA) took the time to respond to a survey about what they did and thought in their own research lives. Results are reported in this issue [1]. This impressive research presentation deserves some comment. First, we have to consider who filled out the survey. The response rate was less than 20%, meaning that 4 out of 5 MLA members did not respond. Who are these nonresponders? We can only speculate. My guess is they compose 2 groups: some too busy to take the relatively short survey (34 questions) and the rest just not interested in surveys about research. My estimate is the second was the larger group. They are probably younger, too. Most of those who did respond were more than 10 years out from their library degrees. Which means that interest in research and barriers to research that the survey found may not represent MLA membership in general. The other four out of five members may have totally different viewpoints. And opinions may have changed since the survey was done five years ago. Caution in interpretation of surveys is always wise. Still, there were some interesting findings. The researchers divided results into two groups, academics versus hospital librarians. An “Other” group was included but was too diverse to categorize. Most respondents read research literature at least between once a week and once a month. They generally felt that research had benefits for library decision making, to guide collections and improve or initiate new services. They also agreed that research can demonstrate library value to funding authorities. Because the academic environment is generally more supportive of research, it was no surprise that academics were more likely than hospital librarians to conduct research, present posters or papers at professional meetings, and apply for grants. Barriers to doing research were similar, except hospital librarians were much more likely to be restricted by lack of time.

D'Où Venons Nous/Que Sommes Nous/Où Allons Nous(Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?).

D'Où Venons Nous/Que Sommes Nous/Où Allons Nous(Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?).

Journal of the Medical Library Association readership survey

Every few years, MLA conducts a survey of the readership of the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). Regular evaluation of the JMLA is required by the association, and this survey is an important part of that process. In October 2012, the survey was sent by email to a random sample of 1,200 Medical Library Association members and nonmember subscribers, and 518 responded. The results are very encouraging. Over 60% of respondents said they read something in every issue of the JMLA; a full 90% reported that they read something at least once a year. This compares favorably to respondents' reports of how often they read other library journals: 54% said they read something in Medical Reference Services Quarterly at least once a year, and a little over 30% said they read something that often in College and Research Libraries, the Journal of Academic Librarianship, and the Journal of Hospital Librarianship. A majority of respondents who read the JMLA thought that the JMLA was better than average in terms of all the qualities listed (timeliness, authoritative information, evidence-based information, relevance, readability, practical information, and value in professional development). The poorest scores were received for readability (Worse than average = 4%) and practical information (Worse than average = 7%). Sixty percent to 70% of those who read the JMLA said that items they had recently read helped them with work-related issues, provided useful information, had practical applications and information not found elsewhere, and contributed to their professional development. Slightly fewer (50%) said it helped them with research. When asked to indicate the topics of the items read, technology was the most frequently chosen topic (67%), followed by instruction (63%) and user behavior (57%). Interlibrary loan, acquisitions and licensing, and bibliometrics were the lowest scoring topics, chosen by approximately 20% of respondents (respondents could select more than 1 option). For the most part, a majority of respondents indicated that the current distribution of sections was “about right.” However, more than a third wanted more electronic resource reviews and case studies, and 10%–11% wanted fewer full-length research papers and book reviews. The percentage recommending elimination of any section was less than 1%, with the exception of book reviews (4%). Between 18% and 11% of responses to all choices for this question was “no opinion,” possibly because these respondents do not regularly look at the section listed. A look at statistics supplied by PubMed Central confirms readers' continuing interest in material published in the JMLA (a word of caution: some fraction of these numbers may represent harvesters rather than actual viewers). We published 18 brief communications in 2012; in the first 4 months after publication, the average brief communication received 170 full-text views and 70 portable document format (PDF) downloads. We published 8 case studies; these received, on average, 299 full-text views and 120 PDF downloads. The 12 full-length research papers had 365 full-text views and 168 PDF downloads. The 4 papers invited for our special issue were clearly of interest as well: 279 full-text views and 124 PDF downloads. By far the most frequently read paper online was the 2011 Janet Doe Lecture by T. Scott Plutchak, AHIP: 6,046 full-text views and 1,308 PDF downloads in just the first 4 months after it appeared! Thank you to everyone who took the time to participate in our readership survey. We will continue to analyze the results so that we can do an even better job of meeting your needs. Sixty-three percent of respondents said that the JMLA is one of the top three to five most important programs or projects provided by the Medical Library Association. We will be working hard to live up to user expectations.

Research: the opportunity wheel keeps turning

Last week, a twenty-eight-year-old clinician came to our library to be oriented. She wanted to know what was available online and pulled out her iPhone from her lab coat pocket. She wanted me to show her the applications she needed not only to access clinical and drug information, but also to access our other library resources, including online journals and information databases. It was clear she had no plans to come to the library ever again nor to sit at her computer in her office looking for information. This jolted me once more into recognition of how our health sciences librarianship field is changing. This clinician is not alone. More than 70% of physicians are now using smart phones, and the number is increasing [1]. We can expect many, if not most, will want to use their smart phones as their standard portal to the medical library. Of course, this is not surprising. As a profession, we have anticipated changes: changes in how information is supplied to us and how we supply it to our patrons. And change always presents research opportunities. The Medical Library Association (MLA) has set priorities to address our changing professional environment and its opportunities for research. The latest list was set in 2008 by the MLA Research Section Research Agenda Committee. The 2008 research list built on MLA's history of research interest. MLA issued its first research policy, Using Scientific Evidence to Improve Information Practice, in 1995 [2]. This was about the same time that evidence-based practice began in the field of medicine, when the value of applying evidence from outcomes research to improve treatment was recognized. The importance of making decisions based on evidence from outcomes research began to be recognized in other job fields, and the same principles were applied to library services. MLA's 1995 policy was a commitment to foster research by the membership and specifically to build a foundation of evidence, according to at least one observer [3]. Ten years later, in 2005, an MLA task force reviewed and updated the 1995 research policy. This task force conducted semi-structured interviews with information professionals and library students from various libraries to gain views of what MLA's role should be in research. This produced a revised and updated research policy, The Research Imperative, which was presented to the MLA Board of Directors in 2007 [4]. Suzanne Grefsheim, FMLA, and colleagues described this task force's approach and its research in the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) the following year, 2008 [5]. Their paper reaffirmed MLA's commitment to research. It also highlighted the needs for librarians to gain a solid knowledge foundation for research and to put evidence-based results into their practice. Perhaps more importantly, it suggested that MLA needed to develop and provide a supportive culture for its members to grow as researchers. Some of the recommended goals were to identify a research agenda, advocate access to and support of library and information science research, foster collaborations, and educate MLA members to conduct better research. The article included a recommendation to develop a Research Section subcommittee that would identify the most important research questions for health sciences librarianship.

Face-to-face Training is the Preferred Modality of Professional Continuing Education for Librarians of All Ages, but More Evidence is Needed

A Review of:
 Lynn, V. A., Bose, A., & Boehmer, S. J. (2010). Librarian instruction-delivery modality preferences for professional continuing education. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 98(1), 57-64.
 
 Objective — To establish the preferred modality for professional continuing education (CE) among members of three library associations. The primary hypothesis was that face-to-face training is the preferred modality, and the secondary hypothesis was that younger librarians are more likely to favour online or blended training modalities. In addition, the authors sought to investigate which factors influence participants' decisions to take up training.
 
 Design — Online questionnaire.
 
 Setting — Three library associations based in the United States of America. These were the American Library Association (ALA), the Special Libraries Association (SLA), and the Medical Library Association (MLA).
 
 Subjects — A random sample of 328 members of the ALA (86 participants), SLA (63 participants), and MLA (291 participants). Some participants were members of more than one association.
 
 Methods — Participants were recruited to complete an online survey via direct e-mail contact (MLA), messages on email discussion lists (SLA) and social networks (ALA). The survey asked about participants' experience of, and preference for, five different training modalities for CE. These were: face-to-face (classroom instruction), web-based synchronous (with real-time participant-instructor interaction), web-based asynchronous (with instructor involvement, but not in real time), blended (a combination of different modalities), and webcasts (live online presentations with limited participant-instructor interaction). Participants were then asked to rank factors which would influence their decision to undertake CE courses. The factors were cost, opportunity to socialize/network, time away from work, learning at their own pace, and having immediate access to either the class instructor or other participants. Participants were also given space to comment on both CE modalities and influencing factors.
 
 Main Results — There was a statistically significant preference for face-to-face instruction in this sample, being preferred by at least 73.1% of participants in all age ranges. Younger librarians did not display a preference for online or blended training modalities. There was a significant difference in second preference between ALA and MLA members, who both preferred Web based asynchronous training, and SLA members, who preferred the web-based synchronous format. Participants' preferences for all modalities apart from face to face were significantly different depending on whether or not they had experienced the particular modality. Cost was ranked as the most influential factor in the decision to undertake CE by members of all three library associations (significant at P

Librarian instruction-delivery modality preferences for professional continuing education

Attending professional continuing education (CE) is an important component of librarianship. This research study identified librarians' preferences in delivery modalities of instruction for professional CE. The study also identified influential factors associated with attending CE classes. Five instruction-delivery modalities and six influential factors were identified for inclusion in an online survey. The survey completed by members of the American Library Association (ALA), Special Libraries Association (SLA), and Medical Library Association (MLA) provided the data for analysis of librarian preferences and influential factors. The majority of respondents were MLA members, followed by ALA and SLA members. Librarians from all three library associations preferred the face-to-face instructional modality. The most influential factor associated with the decision to attend a professional CE class was cost. All five instruction-delivery modalities present useful structures for imparting professional CE. As librarians' experience with different modalities increases and as technology improves, preferences in instruction delivery may shift. But at present, face-to-face remains the most preferred modality. Based on the results of this study, cost was the most influential factor associated with attending a CE class. This may change as additional influential factors are identified and analyzed in future studies.

Elizabeth King Eaton, 1943–2009

Elizabeth King Eaton, 1943–2009

Teaching Web 2.0 technologies using Web 2.0 technologies

The research evaluated participant satisfaction with the content and format of the "Web 2.0 101: Introduction to Second Generation Web Tools" course and measured the impact of the course on participants' self-evaluated knowledge of Web 2.0 tools. The "Web 2.0 101" online course was based loosely on the Learning 2.0 model. Content was provided through a course blog and covered a wide range of Web 2.0 tools. All Medical Library Association members were invited to participate. Participants were asked to complete a post-course survey. Respondents who completed the entire course or who completed part of the course self-evaluated their knowledge of nine social software tools and concepts prior to and after the course using a Likert scale. Additional qualitative information about course strengths and weaknesses was also gathered. Respondents' self-ratings showed a significant change in perceived knowledge for each tool, using a matched pair Wilcoxon signed rank analysis (P<0.0001 for each tool/concept). Overall satisfaction with the course appeared high. Hands-on exercises were the most frequently identified strength of the course; the length and time-consuming nature of the course were considered weaknesses by some. Learning 2.0-style courses, though demanding time and self-motivation from participants, can increase knowledge of Web 2.0 tools.

The Research Imperative: Medical Library Association policy and the curricula of schools of library and information science

Ten years after the Medical Library Association (MLA) adopted its first research policy, the 1995 Using Scientific Evidence to Improve Information Practice [1], MLA President Joanne Gard Marshall, FMLA, appointed a task force to research and publish a new official statement [2]. The resulting MLA research policy statement, The Research Imperative, was approved by the MLA Board of Directors in 2007 and “challenges MLA members to build a supportive culture that values and contributes to a research base that is recognized as an essential tool for future practice” [2]. It describes domains of research as well as basic, advanced, and specialized research skills sets. The Research Imperative encourages health sciences library and information science (LIS) practitioners to take advantage of different educational opportunities to acquire and build on that skills set. Specifically, it recommends, “4. MLA will provide and promote education and training to support health sciences information research. To accomplish this recommendation, MLA will work with academic programs to ensure that opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills appear throughout the curriculum, provide a complete range of basic and advanced courses in quantitative and qualitative research methodology through MLA's continuing education (CE) program, and encourage graduate LIS schools to require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]. Curricular decisions for programs leading to the LIS master's degree (MLIS) are shaped by many factors, not the least of which is the very wide variety of careers that holders of such degrees can expect to have. Many will undoubtedly work in school, public, academic, or special libraries. Many others will be information professionals in archives, museums, corporations, and other organizations. In any case, a major driver for MLIS curricula is program accreditation by the American Library Association (ALA). The ALA Standards for Accreditation do not specify exactly what courses should be taught, but the accreditation seeks evidence of various curricular elements. In particular, the standards require that a program's mission, goals, and objectives include: “the importance of research to the advancement of the field's knowledge base…the importance of the contributions of library and information studies to other fields of knowledge [and]…the importance of the contributions of other fields of knowledge to library and information studies.” Furthermore, they seek evidence that the curriculum of an accredited program “emphasizes the evolving body of knowledge that reflects the findings of basic and applied research from relevant fields” [4]. Do MLIS academic programs “ensure…opportunities to develop quantitative and qualitative research knowledge and skills?” Do they “require master's degree students to undertake a research project in information science” [3]? Evidence of such opportunities would include (but not be limited to) courses and evidence of whether research projects are required for graduation from such programs. In a comparison of LIS research course requirements with those of other master's level programs in related disciplines, Park studied the 2002 graduate catalogs of fifty-two of the then fifty-six ALA-accredited MLIS programs as well as the catalogs of master's of business administration, master's of social work, and master's of education programs at some of those schools. She found that all but three of the MLIS programs offered research methods courses, but only twenty required such a course for graduation [5]. Park reported that “LIS does not use consistent terminology across schools to identify what constitutes a ‘research methods’ course” and that the courses “vary from comprehensive coverage of both quantitative and qualitative methods to superficial inclusion of simple survey methods.” Park discussed aspects of the MLIS degree that related to research “at the consumer level” and “at the contributor level” [5]. Evidence-based LIS (and other types of evidence-based practice) are examples of the use of the consumer level of research expertise. Practitioners in many fields can confuse the two functions, especially when the word “research” is taken to include searching literature for published scientific studies, as opposed to actually carrying out such studies. The Research Imperative quite rightly calls for health sciences librarians to practice as consumers of and contributors to research in the discipline. This study seeks evidence of the current availability of required or elective research methods courses and research projects as a graduation requirement in ALA-accredited masters' programs in library and information science.

Affirming our commitment to research: the Medical Library Association's research policy statement: the process and findings

Building on its 1995 research policy statement, the Medical Library Association (MLA) has issued a new research policy, The Research Imperative. This paper shares the background research that informed the new policy. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with fifty-one key informants representing various library types, functions, geographic locations, ages, and ethnicities. The grounded theory approach was used to analyze the resulting textual database. Additionally, to gather input from the membership as a whole, two open forums were held at MLA annual meetings. Key informant data indicated that the policy should provide roles for MLA in leadership, advocacy, collaboration, services, education, publishing, and development of a research agenda. Evidence-based library and information practice was emphasized. Six themes emerged to center the new policy: creation of a research culture, challenges, domains of research, research skills set, roles of stakeholders, and measurement of progress. Reflecting the interests and beliefs of the membership, The Research Imperative challenges MLA members to build a supportive culture that values and contributes to a research base that is recognized as an essential tool for future practice.

The Leadership Reconsidered symposium: report.

On May 22, 2002, a symposium was conducted at MLA '02, the 102d Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association (MLA), to explore the concepts of leadership and management. The symposium was cosponsored by the MLA Leadership and Management Section and the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL), with support from Majors Scientific Books and Aries Systems Corporation. The overall symposium goal was to develop a strategic agenda for leadership in health sciences libraries through defining the issues and recommending actions. Symposium objectives were to: obtain an overview of library leadership issues from national experts in the field; hear the latest research on the attributes that present and future library leaders need to possess; learn about existing library leadership development programs; brainstorm in facilitated discussions about the leadership challenges facing health sciences libraries; and engage in dialogue with leaders from MLA, AAHSL, the National Library of Medicine (NLM), and other MLA members about how the profession must respond to these challenges and provide recommendations for a strategic agenda for future action. Registrants included 100 health sciences librarians, representing both academic and hospital library environments, including eighteen colleagues acting as group facilitators and recorders. Seven speakers covered various aspects of leadership as well as examples of library leadership development programs in existence throughout the country. Participants also took part in group brainstorming sessions with the results reported to the symposium. A list of attendees can be found on the symposium Website.