Submissions

Online Submissions

Already have a Username/Password for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice?
Go to Login

Need a Username/Password?
Go to Registration

Registration and login are required to submit items online and to check the status of current submissions.

 
  • » Privacy Statement
  • Online Submissions

    Already have a Username/Password for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice?
    Go to Login

    Need a Username/Password?
    Go to Registration

    Registration and login are required to submit items online and to check the status of current submissions.

     

    Author Guidelines


    • Please note: If you already have a Username/Password for EBLIP, please verify that you are registered as an Author prior to beginning the submission process. To verify your registration status, log in using your existing username and password, then go to User Home >> My Account >> Edit My Profile, ensure that both the “Reader” and “Author” boxes are checked, and click Save.
    • The editors are responsible for final decisions regarding publication and reserve the right to edit for brevity, clarity and consistency of style.
    • A final decision to publish or not is decided by the appropriate editor after the double blind peer review is completed. The aim is to have papers reviewed within 2 months of receipt.
    • All submissions to EBLIP should be in APA style.


    ARTICLES
    Papers are welcomed on all areas of EBL/EBP including:
    • EBL application
    • Qualitative and quantitative research
    • Management and Administration issues related to EBP
    • Research Tools (statistics, data collection methods, etc.)
    • Collaborative and InterProfessional EBP
    • Research education in library schools
    • Evidence-Based Practices from other disciplines applicable to EBL
    • Harnessing evidence to support new innovations
    • Developing and applying evidence based tools
    • Future prospects for the evidenced based information profession
    • Maximizing the value and impact of our information services

    Submissions should include:


    1. A structured abstract (250-500 words) using the following headings:

      • Objective
      • Methods
      • Results
      • Conclusions

      See: Bayley, Liz and Jonathan D. Eldredge. The Structured Abstract: An Essential Tool for Researchers MLA Research Section, http://research.mlanet.org/structured_abstract.html. Last accessed May 5, 2005.

    2. Articles should be written in a formal/academic style using the following headings as appropriate:

      • Introduction (Background and introduction to the paper and why the work was carried out)
      • Literature Review (An overview of relevant literature, summarising previous work in the area and highlighting the gaps and where your work fits in)
      • Aims (Aims of the paper/research)
      • Methods (How the study was conducted – this shouldn’t be too descriptive but it should provide enough information for someone to replicate your study)
      • Results (The main findings from your study should be presented clearly and concisely)
      • Discussion (A discussion of the findings from your study – set in the context of the wider literature or issues arising from your study. Note any problems or limitations with your study and how these could have affected your results and how they could be avoided in future studies)
      • Conclusions (A summary of what you have undertaken and what you have discovered – this should not contain any new information)


    3. Articles may be up to 5000 words in length.



    REVIEW ARTICLES
    Review articles provide a way for librarians to obtain an overview of the evidence on a particular topic, and stay current with the literature. Reviews may take on several different forms, including an overview, systematic review, meta-analysis, literature review, state-of-the-art review, or umbrella review, among others. For a detailed explanation of the types of reviews possible, please consult:


    Grant, M.J., and Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal 26(2): 91-108.


    EBLIP welcomes review articles of up to 10,000 words on topics of relevance to practitioners in library and information studies. We are particularly interested in reviews which contain information on the state of research on a particular topic.


    Reviews should include a structured abstract and be written in a formal/academic style using the following headings as appropriate:


    • Introduction (Background and introduction to the paper and why the work was carried out)
    • Aims (Aims/objectives of the paper)
    • Methods (How the review was conducted – this shouldn’t be too descriptive but it should provide enough information for someone to replicate your study)
    • Results (The main findings from your review of the literature on a topic should be presented clearly and concisely)
    • Discussion (A discussion of the findings from your review. Note any problems or limitations with your study and how these could have affected your results and how they could be avoided in future studies)
    • Conclusions (A summary of what you have undertaken and what you have discovered – including the implications for practice, and any further research needed)



    EVIDENCE SUMMARIES
    Evidence Summaries follow a structured format are written by a team of writers under the direction of the Associate Editor for this section. If you are interested in writing evidence summaries, or would like to suggest a research article to be reviewed, please contact the Associate Editor (Evidence Summaries).


    USING EVIDENCE IN PRACTICE
    Submissions to this section of EBLIP should be brief reports of LIS practitioners' use of evidence to assist with decision making. This is a non-peer reviewed section. Submissions should be approximately 1500 words in length, and outline the following:

  • Setting -- describe the practice setting where the use of evidence took place. Things to note include type of institution, type of users, environment, country, service currently being offered that you are focusing on.
  • Problem -- describe the problem that arose to make you question the service you were offering. Why did you think there might be a better way to do things?
  • Evidence -- give an overview of the evidence you used to assist with your decision making. This could be evidence from the research literature or local data you compiled. How was the evidence located or collected? Why was this evidence compelling? What did it tell you and why did you believe it? Why did you use this evidence?
  • Implementation -- describe how you implemented a change based on the evidence you found. Provide practical details of what it meant to implement this change.
  • Outcome -- what was the result of your implemented changes? What impact did the changes have? Were the changes successful or not?
  • Reflection -- reflect on the process of trying to implement change in your practice by using evidence. Was this a difficult process or fairly straightforward? Did you encounter any obstacles? What would you do differently next time?


    CLASSICS
    Similar to Evidence Summaries, but focusing on an older research study that has stood the test of time, Classics follow a structured format. If you are interested in suggesting a research article that should be featured as a Classic, or are interested in writing a Classic review, please contact the Associate Editor (Classics).


    COMMENTARIES
    Commentaries are opinion pieces on a topic related to evidence based practice. They should be approximately 1500-3000 words in length. This is a non-peer reviewed section.
    ------------------------


    GUIDANCE

    Guidance on academic writing can be found at
    http://owl.english.purdue.edu/
    See also the following publications:
    Singer Gordon, Rachel. The Librarian's Guide to Writing for Publication. Lanham, Md.:Scarecrow Press, 2004.
    Pickard, Alison Jane. Research Methods in Information. London: Facet, 2007.
    Crawford, Walt. First Have Something to Say: Writing for the Library Profession. Chicago: American Library Association, 2003.
    Hall, George M. How to Write a Paper. London: BMJ Books, 1998.

    Guidance on APA style can be found in:
    American Psychological Association. (2009).Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    See also:
    http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
    http://www.apastyle.org/learn/faqs/index.aspx

     
  • Submission Preparation Checklist

    As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

    1. The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration.
    2. The submission is original work and does not infringe on any third party’s copyright.
    3. You have obtained permission for any third party material that is used in the submission.
    4. The author(s) submitting the work is/are the actual author(s) of the work, not a third party.
    5. You are aware that the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license 2.5 Canada applies to all works published by Evidence Based Library and Information Practice and that authors will retain copyright of their work.
    6. Articles may be up to 5000 words in length.
    7. The submission file is in Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format. Papers will be published in PDF format.
    8. All URL addresses in the text are activated and ready to click. (e.g., http://pkp.sfu.ca)
    9. The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end. Figures are clear, black/white or coloured and numbered using Arabic numbers.
    10. The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements of APA style guidelines.
    11. The text, if submitted to a peer-reviewed section, has had the authors' names removed. The author's name has also been removed from the document's Properties, which in Microsoft Word is found in the File menu.
     

    Copyright Notice

    The Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 2.5 Canada applies to all works published by Evidence Based Library and Information Practice. Authors will retain copyright of the work.

     

    Privacy Statement

    The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.