Search

OBJECTIVE The Medical Library Association (MLA) Board of Directors and president charged an Ethical Awareness Task Force and recommended a survey to determine MLA members' awareness of and opinions about the current Code of Ethics for Health Sciences Librarianship. METHODS THE TASK FORCE AND MLA STAFF CRAFTED A SURVEY TO DETERMINE: (1) awareness of the MLA code and its provisions, (2) use of the MLA code to resolve professional ethical issues, (3) consultation of other ethical codes or guides, (4) views regarding the relative importance of the eleven MLA code statements, (5) challenges experienced in following any MLA code provisions, and (6) ethical problems not clearly addressed by the code. RESULTS Over 500 members responded (similar to previous MLA surveys), and while most were aware of the code, over 30% could not remember when they had last read or thought about it, and nearly half had also referred to other codes or guidelines. The large majority thought that: (1) all code statements were equally important, (2) none were particularly difficult or challenging to follow, and (3) the code covered every ethical challenge encountered in their professional work. IMPLICATIONS Comments provided by respondents who disagreed with the majority views suggest that the MLA code could usefully include a supplementary guide with practical advice on how to reason through a number of ethically challenging situations that are typically encountered by health sciences librarians.

This article presents some limited results from the Medical Library Association (MLA) Benchmarking Network survey conducted in 2002. Other uses of the data are also presented.After several years of development and testing, a Web-based survey opened for data input in December 2001. Three hundred eighty-five MLA members entered data on the size of their institutions and the activities of their libraries. The data from 344 hospital libraries were edited and selected for reporting in aggregate tables and on an interactive site in the Members-Only area of MLANET. The data represent a 16% to 23% return rate and have a 95% confidence level.Specific questions can be answered using the reports. The data can be used to review internal processes, perform outcomes benchmarking, retest a hypothesis, refute a previous survey findings, or develop library standards. The data can be used to compare to current surveys or look for trends by comparing the data to past surveys.The impact of this project on MLA will reach into areas of research and advocacy. The data will be useful in the everyday working of small health sciences libraries as well as provide concrete data on the current practices of health sciences libraries.