‘Personalised evidence’ for personalised healthcare: integration of a clinical librarian into mental health services – a feasibility study

  • Steele R
  • Tiffin P
5Citations
Citations of this article
43Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aims and method To evaluate the feasibility of integrating a clinical librarian (CL) within four mental health teams. A CL was attached to three clinical teams and the Trustwide Psychology Research and Clinical Governance Structure for 12 months. Requests for evidence syntheses were recorded. The perceived impact of individual evidence summaries on staff activities was evaluated using a brief online questionnaire. Results Overall, 82 requests for evidence summaries were received: 50% related to evidence for individual patient care, 23% to generic clinical issues and 27% were on management/corporate topics. In the questionnaires 105 participants indicated that the most common impact on their practice was advice given to colleagues (51 respondents), closely followed by the evidence summaries stimulating new ideas for patient care or treatment (50 respondents). Clinical implications The integration of a CL into clinical and corporate teams is feasible and perceived as having an impact on staff activities. A CL may be able to collate 'personalised evidence' which may enhance individualised healthcare. In some cases the usual concept of a hierarchy of evidence may not easily apply, with case reports providing guidance which may be more applicable than population-based studies.

Figures

  • Fig 1 Trust staff’s responses on (actual or anticipated) impact of evidence summaries.
  • Fig 2 Research design pyramid, with highlighted levels indicating the designs which featured in studies synthesised by the clinical librarian to provide an answer to evidence request 1 (individual patient).
  • Fig 3 Research design pyramid, with highlighted levels indicating the designs which featured in studies synthesised by the clinical librarian to provide an answer to evidence request 6 (broader clinical).
  • Fig 4 Matrix diagram showing tension between ‘salience’ (applicability to unique clinical problem) and ‘level’ (type of study design and methodological robustness) in using research evidence. ECT, electroconvulsive therapy; NICE, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Steele, R., & Tiffin, P. A. (2014). ‘Personalised evidence’ for personalised healthcare: integration of a clinical librarian into mental health services – a feasibility study. The Psychiatric Bulletin, 38(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.112.042382

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 16

84%

Researcher 2

11%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 10

38%

Computer Science 6

23%

Nursing and Health Professions 5

19%

Psychology 5

19%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free