The changing role of subject librarians in academic libraries

Discusses the roles that subject librarians (or 'subject specialists') play in contemporary UK academic libraries. Argues that subject librarians, who still form a significant grouping of senior staff in most UK academic libraries, continue to have a significant role to play in the delivery of library services and that applies to both traditional and electronic library services. Discusses the traditional role of subject librarians and analyzes the way in which this role is changing. Those areas where the changing responsibilities are extensions of traditional roles into new areas are pinpointed, together with examples of where subject librarians are performing new roles and adopting new ways of working. Areas where the changing role of subject librarians can be specifically identified include: greater emphasis on liaison with users; advocacy of the collections; adopting new roles; dealing with user enquiries in new ways; working with technical staff; selecting electronic library materials; carrying out more information skills training; having a greater involvement in the implementation of educational technology; team working and project working. Presents practical examples based on experiences at Nottingham university and other UK research libraries. The redesign and relaunch of Nottingham University Library Web site is described to illustrate many of these points.

Effect of nitric oxide donors on blood pressure and pulse pressure in acute and subacute stroke

High blood pressure (BP), pulse pressure (PP), and rate pressure product (RPP) areeach associated independently with a poor outcome in acute ischemic stroke. Whereas nitric oxide (NO) donors, such as glyceryl trinitrate (GTN), lower blood pressure in acute ischemic stroke, their effect on other hemodynamic measures is not known. We performed a systematic review of the effects of NO donors on systemic hemodynamic measures in patients with acute/subacute stroke. Randomized controlled trials were identified from searches of the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, and Embase. Information on hemodynamic measures, including systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and heart rate, were assessed, and hemodynamic derivatives of these were calculated: PP (PP SBP DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP DBP PP/3), mid blood pressure (MBP (SBP DBP)/2), pulse pressure index (PPI PP/MAP), and RPP (RPP SBP HR). The effect of treatment on hemodynamic measures was calculated as the weighted mean difference (WMD) between treated and control groups with adjustment for baseline. Results: Three trials involving 145 patients were identified; 93 patients received the NO donor, GTN, and 52 control. As compared with placebo, GTN significantly reduced SBP (WMD -9.80 mmHg, p< 0.001), DBP (WMD -4.43 mmHg, p<0.001), MAP (WMD -6.41 mmHg, p< 0.001), MBP (WMD -7.33 mmHg,p<0.001), PP (WMD -6.11 mmHg, p<0.001 ) and PPI (WMD -0.03, p=0.04 ). 3 GTN increased HR (WMD +3.87 bpm, p<0.001) and non-significantly lowered RPP (WMD -323 mmHg.bpm, p=0.14). Conclusion: The NO donor GTN reduces BP, PP and other derivatives in acute and subacute stroke whilst increasing heart rate.

Representativeness, legitimacy and power in public involvement in health-care management

Public participation in health-service management is an increasingly prominent policy internationally. Frequently, though, academic studies have found it marginalized by health professionals who, keen to retain control over decision-making, undermine the legitimacy of involved members of the public, in particular by questioning their representativeness. This paper examines this negotiation of representative legitimacy between staff and involved users by drawing on a qualitative study of service-user involvement in pilot cancer-genetics services recently introduced in England, using interviews, participant observation and documentary analysis. In contrast to the findings of much of the literature, health professionals identified some degree of representative legitimacy in the contributions made by users. However, the ways in which staff and users constructed representativeness diverged significantly. Where staff valued the identities of users as biomedical and lay subjects, users themselves described the legitimacy of their contribution in more expansive terms of knowledge and citizenship. My analysis seeks to show how disputes over representativeness relate not just to a struggle for power according to contrasting group interests, but also to a substantive divergence in understanding of the nature of representativeness in the context of state-orchestrated efforts to increase public participation. This divergence might suggest problems with the enactment of such aspirations in practice; alternatively, however, contestation of representative legitimacy might be understood as reflecting ambiguities in policy-level objectives for participation, which secure implementation by accommodating the divergent constructions of those charged with putting initiatives into practice.