Mapping research impact services in health sciences and medical libraries: an observational study

Xinyu Peng & Fei Yu

Information Research2026https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31iconf64255article
AJG 1
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Introduction. Research impact service is an emerging area of library practice responding to rising demand from funding agencies and institutional administration. This study examines the scope of this service in medical and health sciences libraries and informs practice for developing or expanding such initiatives. Method. An observational content analysis was conducted on publicly accessible webpages of member libraries of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL). Libraries were categorized into four service levels, from basic guides (Level 1) to dedicated teams (Level 4). Data were manually collected and descriptively analyzed for service scope, staffing models, tools, metrics, frameworks, and deliverables. Results. Of 189 libraries (174 U.S., 5 Canada, 10 elsewhere), 140 offer research impact services: 49 at Level 1, 61 at Level 2, 16 at Level 3, and 13 at Level 4. Scopus and Web of Science were most frequently used. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Leiden Manifesto were most referenced. Conclusion(s). While most libraries offer research impact services, fewer than 20% provide advanced support (Levels 3–4), highlighting the need to strengthen workforce capacity in this area.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31iconf64255

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{xinyu2026,
  title        = {{Mapping research impact services in health sciences and medical libraries: an observational study}},
  author       = {Xinyu Peng & Fei Yu},
  journal      = {Information Research},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31iconf64255},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Mapping research impact services in health sciences and medical libraries: an observational study

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.