LITERATURE REVIEWThere's a better way to keep up with the latest developments
taking place in your field. |
VIRGINIA HENDERSON INTERNATIONAL NURSING LIBRARYVirginia Henderson International Nursing Library: A work in progress In the Fourth Quarter 2005 issue of Reflections on Nursing Leadership, readers were told they would be informed of the results of a library data analysis then in progress. Josette Jones, RN, PhD, BC, and her graduate assistant, Dimas Gutierrez, developed the survey tool used to interactively collect information from library users following the July 2005 launch of the redesigned Virginia Henderson International Nursing Library (www.nursinglibrary.org). The survey was posted online during the months of June through September 2005, with questions set to appear at regular intervals as library users utilized specific features of the site. The results obtained were used, along with web logs, to analyze user information needs and search behavior. In the following article, Jones gives her account of this process.
The development and improvement of any interactive, browser-based information system, such as those used by digital libraries, requires consideration of the type of individuals utilizing the system, an understanding of available content and inclusion of a way to measure user interactivity. Information systems not only need to provide useful content, they must also present content in a way that results in an efficient, effective and satisfying user experience. These considerations guided the redesign of user-centered interfaces to extend the functionality of the Virginia Henderson International Nursing Library (VHINL) from that of a library to that of a Web-based portal for accessing nursing knowledge resources. Formal usability evaluations of the previous 2003 version of the VHINL indicated that certain features of the library needed improvement, because they hindered navigation of the system and its use. A survey collected information to assess the error rate and to estimate the seriousness of identified problems. One defect contributed to what is called “low stickiness.” Most user sessions (74.24 percent) lasted only a few seconds, during which page views totaled one or less. Often, as a result of ineffective strategy, search strings were poorly constructed. In response to these findings, consideration was given to a tell-and-ask functional interface in which the user—usually a nurse—communicates with the knowledge base by making logical assertions—tell—and posing questions—ask (Gruber 1993). A prototype of this interface was also developed. Feedback was obtained from key user groups. The formal knowledge structure that currently exists within the library was examined, and features needing expansion were identified along with opportunities for a controlled terminology. These analyses led to revisions of the data model and specification of an information model. The goal was that the knowledge structure and data model be complementary and reflect the search behavior of users.
During the redesign, it became evident that the formal usability evaluation did not adequately reveal the interface’s degree of effectiveness in supporting user search tasks, nor did it take into consideration the overall environment in which search tasks are performed (Richardson, Ormerod, & Shepard, 1998; Paradowski & Fletcher, 2004). Hence, an extended evaluation of the usability and utility of the redesigned library was proposed. In the proposed evaluation, human-computer interactions and search behaviors were to be studied in their natural environment. Web logs were to be used to detect patterns of cognitive activities, as well as behaviors that occur during human-computer interaction. Random pop-up surveys would complement web log analyses. Preliminary survey results Research was cited most frequently (45.7 percent) as the reason for conducting a search, followed by professional development (40.3 percent). Seventeen percent of the searches were reported as unsuccessful, while 14 percent were successful. (About 41 percent responded to the question, 31 percent indicating whether or not they considered their search a success. Ten percent were uncertain because they wanted to explore the site further.) Of those reporting nonsuccess, 10.5 percent indicated they definitely would repeat their search elsewhere, using online digital libraries such as CINAHL or MEDLINE, and 6.4 percent indicated they would not repeat their search. Three times, searches were interrupted by the popup survey or by an error message. Registration of research studies (22 records) was perceived as “somewhat intuitive” to “very intuitive.” Two respondents described the process as difficult. Eleven researchers indicated they would continue making research available to the nursing community. Five indicated that they will probably make research available and four that they absolutely will not do so. The majority of nurse researchers who responded experienced no difficulty with the registration process. Four respondents reported that the terminology and taxonomy were too limited and the process too cumbersome. During the observation period, hyperlinks to online nursing resources were used 209 times by the 59 users completing surveys. Overall, respondents indicated that finding resources was easy, although it helped to have Web-searching experience. Despite their success in locating resources, users indicated that the results did not meet expectations. Often, users were unable to find full-text articles or pointers to full-text articles. Six users acknowledged that these poor results were due to inability to focus their searches or that they had inadvertently accessed the survey page. Five users were unable to open a particular link and, in three instances, searches were interrupted prematurely by the online survey. What’s next? Ongoing data mining and analysis of web logs, together with random online surveys, are warranted to evaluate whether the system adequately supports user information and search needs. Indexing of variables and keywords, as well as search strings, will be mapped to International Classification for Nursing Practice (ICNP) terminology to facilitate searching for clinical practice. Other terminologies—such as Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terminology (SNOMED-CT), Nursing Management Minimum Data Set (NMMDS) and Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) thesauri—will be used for linking to nonclinical concepts such as education and administration. An ICNP pilot project work group has been established to focus on mapping methods and potential use of these comparisons for future mappings. Use of ICNP to implement strategies for indexing and retrieving content available at Virginia Henderson International Nursing Library is also being considered. RNL —Josette Jones, RN, PhD, BC, assistant professor, School of Nursing and School of Nursing Informatics at Indiana University in Indianapolis Other pilot project contributors: In addition to the author, members of the ICNP pilot project team include: Amy Coenen, RN, PhD, FAAN, director of the ICNP program, International Council of Nurses, and associate professor, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Maureen T. Greene, RN, CNS-BC, ACNP-BC, nurse graduate and doctoral student at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Marcelline Harris, RN, PhD, consultant, Division of Nursing Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.; and Cheryl Bagley Thompson, RN, PhD, associate professor and director of informatics at University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Nursing. References Gruber, T.R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition, 5 (2), 199-220. Paradowski, M., & Fletcher, A. (2004). Using task analysis to improve usability of fatigue modelling software. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60 (1), 101-115. Richardson, J., Ormerod, T.C., & Shepherd. (1998). The role of task analysis in capturing requirements for interface design. Interacting with Computers, 9, 367-384. |
A
new interface and search engine have been installed. Objective
and subjective user data will continuously be captured to improve
user interaction and efficiency of searches. Analysis through
data mining is planned to evaluate whether the revised knowledge
model is consistent with the search behavior model, without unduly
restricting a user’s logical assertions or reasoning process
in making queries.
During
the 60-day survey, 1,248 searches for abstracts were recorded.
Students provided a majority of the responses (524), followed
by educators (334) and clinicians (211). A librarian searched
the library eight times. Seven nurse researchers, three nurse
administrators and three nurse practitioners also conducted searches.
Forty-six searches were performed for private use, and purposes
for 92 searches were not identified.