Needs assessment of nurse researchers through a research lifecycle framework


  • Robert Janke University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
  • Kathy Lynn Rush University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus
  • Katherine Miller University of British Columbia, Vancouver Campus



Libraries, Medical, Librarians, Faculty, Nursing, Nursing Research


Objective: Health sciences librarian roles are evolving to better meet the needs of faculty. This study explores nursing faculty needs at the University of British Columbia through the research lifecycle framework of planning, conducting, disseminating, and assessing the impact of their research.

Methods: A mixed methods survey study with Likert scale, multiple-choice, or ordinal ranking-scale questions and six open-response questions was conducted. The format was a web-based Qualtrics survey; participants had approximately three weeks to respond.

Results: Nursing faculty identified the dissemination phase as benefiting most from library support prioritizing reference management and archiving research data as the top needs in that phase. Assessing impact skills such as citation analysis and Altmetrics training was ranked second. The Planning phase was ranked third with systematic review and literature review support most needed. The Conducting phase was identified as the phase where they needed the least support.

Conclusion: Understanding the needs of researchers and enhancing scholar productivity is vital to offering responsive library research services. Across the research lifecycle, nursing faculty identified reference management, data management, metrics evaluation, systematic reviews, and literature reviews as the key areas for which they need support.

Author Biographies

Robert Janke, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus

Associate Chief Librarian, UBC Okanagan Campus Library

Kathy Lynn Rush, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus

Professor, School of Nursing

Katherine Miller, University of British Columbia, Vancouver Campus

Nursing Librarian, Woodward Library


Johnson AM. Connections, conversations, and visibility: How the work of academic reference and liaison librarians is evolving. Ref User Serv Q 2018;58(2):91-102. DOI: 10.5860/rusq.58.2.6929.

Kenney AR. Leveraging the liaison model:From defining 21st century research libraries to implementing 21st century research universities [Web document]. New York, NY: Ithaka S+R, 2014 [cited 9 Jul 2021].

Jaguszewski JM, Williams K. New roles for new times: Transforming liaison roles in research libraries [Web document]. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, 2013 [cited 11 Jun 2021].

Vaughan KTL, Hayes BE, Lerner RC, McElfresh KR, Pavlech L, Romito D, Reeves LH, Morris EN. Development of the research lifecycle model for library services. J Med Libr Assoc 2013;101(4):310-4. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.101.4.013.

Maxwell D. The research lifecycle as a strategic roadmap. J Libr Admin 2016;56(2):111-23. DOI: 10.1080/01930826.2015.1105041.

Ragon B. Alignment of library services with the research lifecycle. J Med Libr Assoc 2019;107(3):384-93. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2019.595.

Grefsheim SF, Rankin JA. Information needs and information seeking in a biomedical research setting: A study of scientists and science administrators. J Med Libr Assoc 2007;95(4):426-34. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.95.4.426.

Cain TJ, Cheek FM, Kupsco J, Hartel LJ, Getselman A. Health sciences libraries forecasting information service trends for researchers: Models applicable to all academic libraries. Coll Res Libr 2016;77(5):595-613. DOI: 10.5860/crl.77.5.595.

He HY, Gerbig M, Kirby S. Needs assessment for improving library support for dentistry researchers. J Med Libr Assoc 2019;107(3):352-63. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2019.556.

Joo S, Peters C. User needs assessment for research data services in a research university. J Libr Inf Sci 2020;52(3):633-46. DOI: 10.1177/0961000619856073.

Tenopir C, Allard S, Frame M, Birch B, Baird L, Sandusky R, Langseth M, Hughes D, Lundeen A. Research data services in academic libraries: Data intensive roles for the future? J Escience Libr 2015;4(2):e1085. DOI: 10.7191/jeslib.2015.1085.

McKeown S, Ross-White A. Building capacity for librarian support and addressing collaboration challenges by formalizing library systematic review services. J Med Libr Assoc 2019;107(3):411-9. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2019.443.

Edmunds Otter ML, Wright JM, King NV. Developing the librarians' role in supporting grant applications and reducing waste in research: Outcomes from a literature review and survey in the NIHR research design service. New Rev Acad Libr 2017;23(2-3):258-74. DOI: 10.1080/13614533.2017.1330219.

Monroe-Gulick A, Valentine G, Brooks-Kieffer J. "You need to have a street beat": A qualitative study of faculty research needs and challenges. Portal 2017;17(4):777-802. DOI: 10.1353/pla.2017.0046.

Luca E,J., Ulyannikova Y. Towards a user-centred systematic review service: The transformative power of service design thinking. J Aust Libr Inf Assoc 2020;69(3):357-74. DOI: 10.1080/24750158.2020.1760506.

Murphy SA, Boden C. Benchmarking participation of canadian university health sciences librarians in systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc 2015;103(2):73-8. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.103.2.003.

Demetres MR, Wright DN, DeRosa AP. Burnout among medical and health sciences information professionals who support systematic reviews: An exploratory study. J Med Libr Assoc 2020;108(1):89-97. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2020.665.

Schulte SJ, Sherwill-Navarro PJ. Nursing educators' perceptions of collaboration with librarians. J Med Libr Assoc 2009;97(1):57-60. DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.013.

Janke R, Rush KL. The academic librarian as co-investigator on an interprofessional primary research team: A case study. Health Info Libr J 2014 Jun;31(2):116-22. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12063 [doi].

McDonald B, Gibson I, Yates E, Stephenson C. An exploration of faculty experiences with open access journal publishing at two canadian comprehensive universities. Partnership 2017;11(2). DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v11i2.3703.

Odell J, Palmer K, Dill E. Faculty attitudes toward open access and scholarly communications: Disciplinary differences on an urban and health science campus. J Libr Sch Commun 2017;5(1):eP2169. DOI: 10.7710/2162-3309.2169.

Dawson D. The scholarly communications needs of faculty: An evidence-based foundation for the development of library services. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract 2014;9(4):4-28. DOI: 10.18438/B8R88C.

Dhakal K, Tornwall J. The scholarship circle: An introduction to writing for publication for nursing faculty. J Med Libr Assoc 2020;108(1):98-105. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2020.685.

DeSanto D, Nichols A. Scholarly metrics baseline: A survey of faculty knowledge, use, and opinion about scholarly metrics. Coll Res Libr 2017;78(2):150-70. DOI: 10.5860/crl.78.2.150.

Thuna M, King P. Research impact metrics: A faculty perspective. Partnership 2017;12(1):1-25. DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v12i1.3906.

Inman M, Blevins AE, Ketterman E, Young KL. Now tell us what you want: Information-seeking habits of health sciences faculty. Med Ref Serv Q 2019;38(2):131-42. DOI: 10.1080/02763869.2019.1588046.

Kenyon J, Attebury R, Doney J, Godfrey B, Martinez J, Seiferle-Valencia M. Help-seeking behaviors in research data management. Iss Sci Technol Libr 2020(96):1-17. DOI: 10.29173/istl2568.

Nickels C, Davis H. Understanding researcher needs and raising the profile of library research support. Insights 2020;33(1):1-13. DOI: 10.1629/uksg.493.






Original Investigation