2013 Issue

In an effort to improve compliance with the NIH Public Access Policy, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently announced that more stringent standards will soon take effect. As described in the NIH guide notice, Upcoming Changes to Public Access Policy Reporting Requirements and Related NIH Efforts to Enhance Compliance,

“…in Spring, 2013, at the earliest, NIH will delay processing of non-competing continuation grant awards if publications arising from that award are not in compliance with the NIH public access policy. The award will not be processed until recipients have demonstrated compliance. This change will take effect in tandem with NIH requiring the use of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPRs) for all Streamlined Non-competing Award Process (SNAP) and Fellowship awards in the Spring of 2013.”¹

The NIH Public Access Policy requires researchers to submit final peer-reviewed journal manuscripts that arise from NIH funds to PMC upon acceptance for publication. The policy requires that these papers be accessible to the public through PMC no later than 12 months after publication.

There are three submission methods for final published articles:

1. A number of journals automatically deposit the final published article to PMC without author involvement.
2. The author can make arrangements to have the publisher deposit a final published article in PMC—usually for a fee.
3. The author deposits the final peer-reviewed manuscript in PMC via the NIH Manuscript Submission System.

HSLS maintains a Scholarly Communication Web site that provides information and guidance on the NIH Public Access Policy, including policy basics, compliance, article submission, and more.

1. “Upcoming Changes to Public Access Policy Reporting Requirements and Related NIH Efforts to Enhance Compliance,” National Institutes of Health Office of Extramural Research, accessed January 3, 2013, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-12-160.html.

~ Jill Foust

In the fall of 2010, UPMC physicians, residents, and nurses were invited to participate in the initial phase of a multi-site survey of the role of library information resources in improving patient care. The results of the full study were recently published.¹ In this study, clinicians from 118 hospitals completed an online survey that asked them to think of an occasion when they required additional information for a patient care issue, and to then answer questions about the impact of access to library information resources on patient outcomes for that particular case.

Nearly every study participant agreed that information resources available from their libraries were relevant (99 percent), accurate (99 percent) and current (97 percent). The high quality of information available was not just appreciated, however—75 percent of participants agreed that access to the information definitely or probably changed how they handled an aspect of patient care, including advice given to a patient (48 percent), drug choice (33 percent), and diagnosis (25 percent). Participants (85 percent) indicated that having access to the information saved them time, with the average amount of time saved estimated to be 2.5 hours.

In addition to these positive impacts, clinicians believed the information provided by libraries helped to avoid negative events such as patient misunderstanding of disease (23 percent), misdiagnosis (13 percent), adverse drug events (13 percent), medication errors (12 percent), patient mortality (6 percent), and hospital acquired infections (3 percent).

In follow-up interviews, a subset of participants reiterated the clinical value of having access to current and accurate information, and the impact such access has on patient safety. Clinicians also commented on the value of having access to professional librarians who can assist with patient care, either through provision of literature searches for busy clinicians, or through education of clinicians in the most efficient use of library resources.

1. J.G. Marshall, J. Sollenberger, S. Easterby-Gannett, L.K. Morgan, M. Klem M, et al., “The Value of Library and Information Services in Patient Care: Results of a Multisite Study,” Journal of the Medical Library Association 101 no. 1 (2013): 38-46.

~ Mary Lou Klem

Elsewhere in this issue, Mary Lou Klem reports on the newly-published results of the Value of Libraries project, a multi-site study aimed at determining the impact of the library’s information resources and services on patient care. UPMC participated in the pilot phase of this project. In this survey study, clinicians were asked to think about an occasion in the last six months when they looked for information resources for patient care (beyond what is available in the eRecord or lab results) and to answer questions regarding that occasion.

A total of 1,473 UPMC physicians, residents, and nurses responded to the survey. Continue reading →