Jocelyn A Rankin1, Suzanne F Grefsheim, Candace C Canto. 1. CDC Information Center, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop C04, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA. jrankin@cdc.gov
Abstract
PURPOSE: A systematic literature review was conducted to synthesize what is known about informationists, highlight program models, and suggest areas for future research. METHODS: Articles retrieved through database searching were reviewed for relevance. Informationist case reports were identified and coded according to an attributes checklist. Data from other retained publications were synthesized under broad themes. The few research studies found were reviewed for level of evidence. RESULTS: Of 113 papers reviewed, the study identified 7 classic and 8 emerging informationist programs. Two major models are apparent, clinical and research, with priorities differing according to program maturity. The literature synthesis also brought together current thinking about informationist qualifications; practice roles; setting characteristics; education and training; organizational, programmatic, and service provider success factors; and challenges and barriers. Program outcomes to date are reported, and future research topics suggested. Specific findings will assist informationist program planners. CONCLUSIONS: While the informationist concept remains in the early adopter stage, it appears that domain knowledge, continuous learning, and embedding (working in context) are essential to success. The need for librarians to transition to greater specialization and libraries to emphasize customized service was underscored. A research agenda focused on information management, dissemination, behaviors, and economics is proposed.
PURPOSE: A systematic literature review was conducted to synthesize what is known about informationists, highlight program models, and suggest areas for future research. METHODS: Articles retrieved through database searching were reviewed for relevance. Informationist case reports were identified and coded according to an attributes checklist. Data from other retained publications were synthesized under broad themes. The few research studies found were reviewed for level of evidence. RESULTS: Of 113 papers reviewed, the study identified 7 classic and 8 emerging informationist programs. Two major models are apparent, clinical and research, with priorities differing according to program maturity. The literature synthesis also brought together current thinking about informationist qualifications; practice roles; setting characteristics; education and training; organizational, programmatic, and service provider success factors; and challenges and barriers. Program outcomes to date are reported, and future research topics suggested. Specific findings will assist informationist program planners. CONCLUSIONS: While the informationist concept remains in the early adopter stage, it appears that domain knowledge, continuous learning, and embedding (working in context) are essential to success. The need for librarians to transition to greater specialization and libraries to emphasize customized service was underscored. A research agenda focused on information management, dissemination, behaviors, and economics is proposed.