Peer Reviewed

Hypothesis: Failure

Hypothesis: Failure is a peer-reviewed regular column and the brainchild of Column Editor Heather Holmes. The column is intended to provide a pioneering platform to share experiences that didn't end as expected (or that didn't end at all).  

Every submission should include:

Structured abstract:

  • Objective(s): What was your original intent?
  • Methods: What did you do?
  • Results: What happened instead?
  • Lessons learned: What would you do differently?

The main document should elaborate on ideas or themes mentioned in the structured abstract. Casual language is acceptable for Hypothesis Failure submission. These submissions should be anonymized and they are evaluated by double blind peer review.

Examples:

Miller, J. M. (2021). Challenges of the two-year manuscript: Engaging in reflective practice with a manuscript about reflective practice. Hypothesis32(1). https://doi.org/10.18060/23971

Neilson, C., & Lê, M. L. (2019). A failed attempt at developing a search filter for systematic review methodology articles in Ovid Embase. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA107(2), 203.

Please feel free to contact Heather Holmes, Column Editor, about possible submissions. 

Make a new submission to Hypothesis: Failure.

Methods Moment

Methods moment columns should be written in a casual, practical style and each submission undergoes double blind peer review.  A given column will not aim to be comprehensive of a topic; instead, it should give enough detail to familiarize the reader with the topic, help them imagine the topic’s practical application in health librarian research, and lead interested readers to explore further. The Methods Moment Submission template provides additional guidance on how to format submissions.

Structured Abstract (200 words):

  • Method Name(s):
  • Description:
  • Process:

Manuscript (3000 words)

  • Overview: The overview should include a short definition or description of the method or topic. It will then explain the method or topic, its purpose or role in producing research findings, and why it might be of interest to health science librarians in their research. The overview should stand on its own for readers who are curious but do not want to explore further.
  • Example: The example section should illustrate how the method or topic plays out during research in practice. The example might be a narrative description of the topic in action, a personal experience of application, or a mock case study describing an imaginary scenario of when and how the topic would be applied. In your example, include some strengths of this method and limitations when using this method.
  • Resources: The resources section should point readers to places for further exploration and self-guided learning. This should be a curated list of materials for interested learners. Wherever possible, if learning materials exist then they should be pointed to in the resources rather than trying to include instructional content in the overview. Most of the resources should be freely accessible, rather than subscription resources with limited availability.

However, alternative formats may be considered! Good alternative formats could include compare-and-contrast between two related methods, brief reports of methods Institutes focusing on ideas for self-guided exploration, or summaries of discussion events among librarians who use a certain method. Creative approaches to addressing the needs of practitioners new to research are encouraged.

For questions about Methods Moment (e.g., submissions, formatting, etc.), email column editor Nina Exner

Published Examples of Methods Moments Column:

Exner, N. (2021). Case studies. Hypothesis32(1). https://doi.org/10.18060/24048

Make a new submission to Methods Moment.

Research

These submissions (e.g. Case Reports, Systematic Reviews, Surveys, Case Study, etc.) must have a structured abstract and follow the guidelines outlined below:

Structured Abstract (300 words): Objective, population or problem, methods, findings, and conclusions. Consult the MLA Research Section’s structured abstract guidelines for more information on abstract requirements.

The Body of Paper (5000 words): Consult the MLA Style Manual for help with formatting and style.

  • Introduction: Provide concise overview of study, including research questions, population or problem, methods
  • Literature Review: Explain the need for research based on prior work. Use JMLA-approved citation style (see http://www.mlanet.org/p/cm/ltd/fid=198)
  • Methods: Clearly explain process of gathering appropriate and sufficient information to answer research questions. The process may be qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, but it should be replicable based on provided information. If appropriate, mention human ethics or Institutional Review Board approval.
  • Findings: Clearly explain process of analyzing findings using figures, tables, etc. Additional links to data should be listed in article, as appropriate.
  • Discussion: Discuss implications of findings and suggestions for future research. Be  transparent about assumptions, possible bias, and weaknesses of design or processes: no research is perfect!
  • Supplemental Materials: Include, as an appendix, survey questions or other information needed for reproducibility. If you would like to include raw data files, please contact the editors.

Make a new submission to Research.

Voices of Experience 

Submissions are intended to be experiential or reflective in nature, while also providing readers with some background information on methods or processes.  Your intended audience should be both librarians interested in or currently doing research.  These submissions undergo double blind peer review. Authors are encouraged to consult the Citing Medicine, Second Edition, for assistance with formatting of citations. When creating the submission document, authors are encouraged to follow the guidelines outlined in the Voices of Experience Submission Template. 

Structured Abstract (300 words excluding headings below): 

  • Background/Introduction: 
  • Experience: 
  • Discussion: 
  • Takeaways: 

Manuscript Structure (5000 words – excluding citations and appended materials): 

  • Background/Introduction: Give the audience the “why” or purpose of your article.  
  • Experience: Describe your experience. Your writing should be professional in quality, but it is acceptable to use first person in this section of the manuscript. 
  • Discussion: Discuss what you have learned as a result of or by going through this experience.
  • Takeaways: Make a few suggestions or provide skills learned during/as a result of this experience for the reader. 

Make a new submission to  Voices of Experience.