Abstract:

The rise in published medical papers is exponential [1]. Doctors can only read a fraction of these papers. Hence information literacy (IL), knowing how to find, select, use and appraise academic papers, is essential for doctors. Yet, research shows that doctors hold low levels of IL upon graduation [2]. Thus, there is a clear need to develop tailored learning designs to hospital doctors. Online and blended learning are increasingly being developed to meet these constraints, but little is known of what applies to these educational methods and how they relate to face-to-face education [3]. The aim of this paper is to develop a set of design principles for an online learning design to develop hospital doctors’ IL. Methodologically, we base the design principles on findings from a comprehensive literature review of 17 studies and in-depth semi-structured interviews with hospital doctors and information specialists (IS). The literature search was conducted in Medline (Ovid) and Web of Science bibliographic databases and the database platform ProQuest for the period of 1995 to February 2018. We also did a simple search in Google Scholar. 164 unique references were assessed for eligibility, with 17 studies qualified for the review. The interviews involved three hospital doctors and three ISs from health scientific libraries. Recordings were transcribed and analysed using inductive coding [4]. The theoretical framework consisted of a combination of learning theory, information science and design thinking from a pragmatic viewpoint [5]. We combined stakeholder perceptions with findings in the literature and identified the following design principles: short and clearly defined learning objects, defined medical subject areas, dialogue, flexibility, free of charge, easy access, and navigation. Stakeholders’ needs were largely overlapping, but it is clear that ISs are key to individually unlocking the concept of IL for doctors. Thus, ISs need a conceptual framework using library didactics when engaging in online learning. The main finding is the need for a balanced approach that considers the complexity of IL. It is also equally important to make clear distinctions between didactic and technological problems. Further research is needed to test the proposed design principles.

References:
[1] L. Bornmann, and R. Mutz, “Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references,” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 2215-2222, 2015.
[2] R. Cullen, R. Clark M Fau - Esson, and R. Esson, “Evidence-based information-seeking skills of junior doctors entering the workforce: an evaluation of the impact of information literacy training during pre-clinical years,” Health information and libraries journal, vol. 28, no. 1471-1842, pp. 119-129, 2011.
[3] D. A. Cook, S. Levinson Aj Fau - Garside, D. M. Garside S Fau - Dupras et al., “Internet-based learning in the health professions: a meta-analysis,” JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 300, no. 10, pp. 1181-96, 2008.
[4] S. Brinkmann, “Methodological breaching experiments: Steps toward theorizing the qualitative interview,” Culture & Psychology, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 520-533, 2016.
[5] P. Dalsgaard, “Pragmatism and Design Thinking,” International Journal of Design, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 143-155, 2014.

Keywords:

Information literacy, library, e-learning, face-to-face instruction, learning design, didactics, hospital doctors, lifelong learning.