Amy Buhler

Evidence-based data for the hemodialysis access surgeon.

The National Kidney Foundation Dialysis Outcomes Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guidelines for Vascular Access (DOQI) have defined the access‐related care for patients with end‐stage renal disease (ESRD). However, the standard of care across the country has fallen short of the DOQI targets. One potential explanation for these shortcomings is the lack of compelling evidence in the literature to support the recommendations. This study was designed to compare the DOQI with the best available evidence in the literature for four clinical questions relevant to the hemodialysis access surgeon: the choice of access type (autogenous versus prosthetic), the type of prosthetic graft, management of the “failing” (nonthrombosed) access, and management of the thrombosed access. The electronic literature databases MEDLINE and Evidence‐Based Medicine Reviews were searched and relevant randomized controlled trials or meta‐analyses were identified for review. No randomized controlled trials comparing autogenous to prosthetic accesses were identified. However, a recent systematic review reported that the patency rates for upper extremity autogenous accesses were superior to their polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) counterparts. The identified randomized trials suggested that the patency rates for the different types of commercially available prosthetic grafts used for access appear comparable. They suggested that standard wall PTFE thickness and prosthetic anastomotic cuffs may be associated with better graft patency, while venous cuffs may be associated with worse patency. Furthermore, the trials suggested percutaneous angioplasty of “failing” prosthetic accesses with greater than 50% stenoses did not appear to improve patency and that routine use of intraluminal stents, as an adjunct to angioplasty, was not beneficial. They did suggest that patency after open surgical revision of “failing” prosthetic accesses was superior to that after percutaneous angioplasty. Lastly, the identified trials suggested that the patency rates after open surgical revision of thrombosed prosthetic accesses was better than after endovascular treatment. Despite the magnitude of hemodialysis‐related access problems, the quality of the evidence supporting the clinical decisions relevant to the access surgeon is limited and further clinical trials are justified.

Perceptions of Plagiarism by STEM Graduate Students: A Case Study

Issues of academic integrity, specifically knowledge of, perceptions and attitudes toward plagiarism, are well documented in post-secondary settings using case studies for specific courses, recording discourse with focus groups, analyzing cross-cultural education philosophies, and reviewing the current literature. In this paper, the authors examine the perceptions of graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines at the University of Florida regarding misconduct and integrity issues. Results revealed students’ perceptions of the definition and seriousness of potential academic misconduct, knowledge of institutional procedures, and views on faculty actions, all with a focus on divergences between US and internationally-educated students. The open-ended questions provide anecdotal evidence to highlight personal experiences, positive and negative, aimed at the faculty, international students and undergraduates. Combined, these findings outline an important part of the campus academic integrity culture at a major American university. Recommendations for local actions also are discussed.

3D technology in libraries: Applications for teaching and research

As emerging technologies appear on the horizon of education every day, they are changing the world of teaching and research continuously with their adoption and integration into libraries, classrooms and research labs. Most of us are familiar with the libraries inside a lab, but hosting a lab inside a library holds tremendous potential for research and instruction. In this paper, we will feature a successful effort of integrating 3D technology and a visualization wall in the Marston Science Library at the University of Florida. We will describe how 3D printing was achieved and will highlight the benefit of the technologies related to the data visualization wall as well as recent 3D models made at the library used for research and teaching. The paper will also describe the lessons learned such as the challenges of maintaining these technologies staffing, maintenance, and environmental health and safety requirements.

Positively Perplexing E-Books: Digital Natives’ Perceptions of Electronic Information Resources

Anecdotal evidence from user surveys and the experiences of information professionals portray a picture that today’s students (i.e., “digital natives”) do not differentiate between the variety of information resources online. The issue of container only becomes problematic to these students when they have to produce a scholarly work and cite their information sources. Then the question becomes, “What is it?” This paper will present preliminary data from a survey of university students on how they recognize and label electronic information resources. The authors will explore such questions as: Do users recognize an e-book as a book? If not, how do they categorize it? Does the amount and placement of labeling from the publisher make a difference in their recognition? Do they differentiate between an academic database and a search engine? Are a newspaper article and a peer-reviewed journal article considered synonymous? Introduction/Background The first e-book proudly raised its head in 1971 with Project Gutenberg (Galbraith, 2011). For libraries, their proliferation began in 1998 with the launch of NetLibrary. But it wasn’t until the later 2000s that the big explosion began. Growth in the public libraries was faster, but the academic world was soon catching up. One difference that developed in academic libraries was the number of platforms e-books were available through. For example, the authors’ county public library offers e-book access through three different platforms. In comparison, their university has, to date, 32 platforms that provide e-book access and are aware of at least a dozen more available in the market. The authors believe this extensive variety potentially plays a role in the confusion of university students when it comes to recognition. The first idea for this research germinated when one of the authors was listening to a presentation on ebrary’s 2011 e-book survey (McKiel, 2012). The speaker was remarking on their surprise that between 2008 and 2011 e-book usage had actually decreased according to the survey responses. However, ebrary’s usage statistics showed that there had, in fact, been a dramatic rise in use over this time period. The author immediately thought “They don’t know what they are using is an e-book.” ebrary recognized this and sent a follow-up survey asking two questions. The first was ‘When you are using electronic resources at your library how often do you know what type of document you are using?” Less than half (47.39%) said “always.” This indicates the majority of students have at least some confusion. Years of experience working with university students provides plenty of anecdotal evidence that students don’t differentiate between the various online resources. It seems that they don’t care what the container is called--until they have to cite it for an annotated bibliography, research paper, poster, or other assignment. Indeed, the second ebrary follow-up question was “Do you care about what electronic document you are using as long at the information is authoritative?” and 53.4% said “no.” The authors could give numerous examples of students asking “How do I cite this journal article?” and the first thing the librarian has to do is correct them on what it actually is. This is not a journal article, it is a book chapter, or it is a government report, and so on. This presented the question, what do today’s university students, who have essentially grown up with the Internet, call the different online resources? Is everything just a website? Experience has also taught librarians that students

Enabling a Network of Scientists: 2010 VIVO Conference

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report on the 2010 VIVO Conference.Design/methodology/approach – Conference report.Findings – VIVO is an open source, semantic web discovery platform for hosting information about researchers, their interests, activities, and accomplishments. The first annual VIVO Conference brought together a diverse group of researchers, developers, publishers, information system vendors, government agencies, and librarians – all united by the common goal of enabling research discovery and supporting collaboration among researchers.Originality/value – This conference report is of interest to information professionals in academia, corporate, and governmental information centers and libraries.