This summer, during declared heat waves, the McGill Libraries serve as cooling centres, offering a comfortable, air-conditioned space where anyone can drop in and take a break from the heat. Whether you’re stopping by for a few minutes or spending the afternoon with us, you’re always welcome! With the exception of the Birks Library, all of our libraries are designated cooling spots this summer. Check out our opening hours and locations here.
There’s more to do than just cool off! Browse the shelves and discover your next favourite read, use the Wi-Fi, or simply relax in a quiet space. Drop by the Schulich Library to browse our Wendy Patrick Collection of consumer health materials or kick back with a free magazine. No library card is required to come in and enjoy the space.
This summer, we’re also featuring a collection of books on managing eco-anxiety, climate change, and environmental resilience. These titles explore the challenges of our changing climate while offering thoughtful perspectives, practical ideas, and stories that inspire hope and action.
In an era where artificial intelligence tools are becoming increasingly integrated into our research and daily workflows, it’s important to remember that even the most sophisticated AI systems can make mistakes, sometimes with information that is easily verifiable. Let’s use a very Montreal example: hockey.
Simple Question, Contradictory Answers
Recently, I conducted a simple experiment with Perplexity, an AI tool that markets itself as a one-stop shop for research and general questions. Their interface features dedicated tabs for Business, Arts & Culture, Tech & Science, Entertainment, and Sports, and their marketing emails actively encourage users to rely on it for everyday task, including looking up sports statistics like “NBA scores from last night.”
I asked a straightforward question: “Who has the most overtime goals in the NHL in the 2025-2026 season as of right now.” Note: this question was asked on January 21st 2026.
The AI’s initial response seemed confident and specific. After reviewing 10 sources, it told me that as of January 21st, 2026, there was a six-way tie for the league lead, with players like J.T. Miller, Steven Stamkos, and Adrian Kempe each having 3 overtime goals.
Fair enough. Six players tied at the top. A reasonable answer for an in-season statistic question.
But then I asked a follow-up question. Because I’m a Montreal Canadiens fan, and something wasn’t adding up.
“How many overtime goals does Cole Caufield have this season?”
After reviewing the same 10 sources, the AI confidently replied that Cole Caufield had 4 overtime goals in the 2025-2026 NHL season.
Wait a minute. If six players were tied for the lead with 3 goals each, how could Cole Caufield have 4 overtime goals and not be mentioned as the leader?
When I pointed out this logical contradiction, the AI had no choice but to acknowledge its error. It confirmed that yes, if Caufield had 4 overtime goals and no other player had more than 3, then he would indeed be the number one overtime goal scorer for the season, contradicting its original answer entirely.
What This Teaches Us
This simple example illustrates several critical lessons for students, researchers, and anyone using AI tools.
1. AI Tools Make Mistakes Even With Verifiable Facts
This wasn’t a matter of opinion or interpretation. Overtime goals in the NHL are publicly tracked statistics that should be straightforward to verify. Yet the AI provided contradictory information within the same conversation.
2. Confidence Doesn’t Equal Accuracy
The AI presented both answers with equal confidence, citing sources each time. A confident tone and reference to sources doesn’t guarantee correctness.
3. Critical Thinking is Your Best Tool
The error only became apparent when I asked a follow-up question and noticed the logical reasoning inconsistency. Passive acceptance of the first answer would have left me with incorrect information.
4. Always Verify Important Information
Admittedly, this particular error had low stakes. No one’s getting hurt if I mistakenly credit the wrong player with the overtime goal lead. But the same AI tool that fails on sports statistics could just as easily provide incorrect information about medication dosages, historical dates for your research paper, or citation requirements for your thesis. If you’re relying on AI-generated information for academic work, professional decisions, or anything where accuracy matters, always verify the facts through authoritative primary sources.
In this case, the NHL’s official statistics page would have provided the correct answer in seconds. No contradictions, no confusion, just reliable data from the source.
Which brings me to my next point…
5. Some Questions Don’t Need AI
Why ask an AI for NHL overtime goal leaders when you could check NHL.com’s official statistics in seconds? For straightforward, easily verifiable facts (sports scores, current weather, stock prices, published statistics, etc.) going directly to the authoritative source is often faster, more reliable, and more appropriate than routing the question through an AI tool.
6. AI is a Tool, Not an Authority
Generative AI tools are powerful assistants for brainstorming, drafting, and exploring ideas, but they should not be treated as authoritative sources of factual information without verification.
Best Practices When Using AI
As you integrate AI tools into your academic work, keep these principles in mind:
Cross-reference important facts with authoritative sources
Question contradictions when you notice them
Maintain healthy skepticism, even with correct-sounding answers
Use AI as a starting point, not an endpoint, for research
Cite primary sources, not AI-generated summaries
The Bottom Line
Artificial intelligence is a remarkable technology that can enhance productivity and learning, but it’s not perfect. The responsibility for accuracy still rests with you, the human user. Think of AI as a well-meaning but occasionally confused assistant rather than an all-knowing oracle.
The next time AI gives you an answer, ask yourself: Does this make sense? Can I verify this? What would happen if this information were wrong? Your critical thinking skills are more valuable than ever in the age of AI.
Have you encountered AI making verifiable errors? Share your experiences in the comments below. And remember: The McGill Libraries team is available to help you find authoritative sources for your academic work.
At the time of this writing, we are on day 22 of a U.S. Government shutdown. When the U.S. Government shuts down, most people think of national parks and travel delays. But the impact goes much deeper, into the systems that keep health sciences research and clinical practice running. Many federally-funded databases and information services discontinue updates or suspend operations, cutting off the flow of reliable information that healthcare professionals rely on to make clinical and policy decisions.
On October 1st 2025, when Congress reached a funding deadlock, disclaimers started popping up on many government websites, including health-related websites regularly used by librarians to support research needs. PubMed, the “National Library of Medicine’s free, searchable bibliographic database supporting scientific and medical research,”1 displayed this alarming banner:
The same banner can be seen on other websites, including MedlinePlus, an information hub for patient and their families, also maintained by the National Library of Medicine (NLM).
Because these tasks are mostly automated, citations are still being uploaded to PubMed, and articles are still being indexed. However, because the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has furloughed thousands of employees, according to Dyer (2025) the indexing of new journals has been suspended.2 But Dyer also notes that when the government resumes its normal activities, the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee – the group responsible for evaluating and approving journals for inclusion in PubMed – will no longer be operational. All 15 members of the committee were terminated by the Trump Administration earlier this fall.3
Another service that has been halted is document lending through DOCLINE, the National Library of Medicine’s official interlibrary loan request routing system. The banner on the DOCLINE homepage states that the NLM will not be fulfilling lending requests during the shutdown.4 Fortunately, participating institutions can still request and share materials among themselves. However, in the last few weeks, medical librarians have reported on the Medical Library Association’s listerserv that they are experiencing problems with DOCLINE, specifically that requests are not automatically rerouting as they normally would. As sometimes happens, when the NLM is the only library holding a particular article, requestors are left in the dark, unable to obtain material until government operations resume. For clinicians, researchers, and students who depend on rapid access to medical literature, even short interruptions like this can affect research progress, delay evidence-based decision making and disrupt patient care.
And just as librarians were beginning to adapt, finding solutions and supporting one another as we so often do, another challenge emerged. Last week we learned of the firing of all Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) library workers. In an earlier blog post on evidence-based medicine, we noted the importance of the CDC and their publication of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In an interview the Washington Post, former CDC librarian Gail Bang, said: “It’s hard — almost impossible — for the researchers to do valid scientific research without the librarians.”5 Every Library, an non-profit organization that supports libraries and librarians in the United States, has started a petition calling on the government to reinstate CDC library workers. The petition has been shared numerous times among health librarians.
The current government shutdown highlights just how fragile the infrastructure supporting health information can be. From suspended updates to PubMed and MedlinePlus, to halted interlibrary loan services through DOCLINE, and the recent firing of CDC library staff, the consequences are far-reaching. Librarians work tirelessly behind the scenes to mitigate these disruptions, but even our ingenuity has limits when those responsible for governance fail to reach a compromise.
Dyer, O. (2025). PubMed is running on autopilot during shutdown, but key independent committee has been abolished. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 391, r2158. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r2158↩︎
This October, we join the McGill community in celebrating Queer History Month, a time to reflect on the contributions, histories, and ongoing advocacy of LGBTQ+ communities. During this time, we are reminded of the importance of visibility, inclusion and understanding across all areas of university life.
We are especially excited to highlight the Keynote Lecture, delivered by Kai Cheng Thom on Wednesday, October 22nd 2025. Registration is now open.
To complement this year’s events, the Schulich Library has curated a collection of books focused on LGBTQ+ health, from inclusive care practices and mental health, to intersectional approaches to wellness. The collection features a mix of scholarly titles for researchers and practitioners, as well as consumer health books written for the general public, reflecting the breadth of perspectives and experiences in LGBTQ+ Health. These titles are on display in the library throughout October and accessible online through our curated reading list.
You can continue to explore queer topics through our subject guides:
LGBTQ+ Health Guide: resources on inclusive clinical care, public health, research and consumer health.
LGBTQ+ Studies Guide: interdisciplinary resources on identity, activism and cultural representation.
LGBTQ+ Music Guide: explore the voices, sounds and histories of queer musicians and composers.
Whether you’re attending events, diving into our book collection, or exploring our guides, we invite you to celebrate Queer History Month with curiosity and reflection.
If you have taken or are currently taking any kind of class in the health sciences at McGill, you will have probably heard about a term called Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) or Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM). EBP/EBM is about “integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from a systematic search.”1 As the librarian for Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME), I am embedded in the EBM portion of first year courses, where we often show students this diagram:
This a classic visual representation of Evidence-Based Medicine and shows how EBM sits at the intersection of three essential components:
Clinical Expertise: this refers to the clinician’s own skills, knowledge and past experiences in treating patients
Best Evidence: this refers to the most current and relevant research available, often from rigorous clinical trials and systematic reviews
Patient Preferences and Values: these refer to the patient’s own experiences, concerns, needs and cultural beliefs that they bring to the encounter.
If any one of these elements is missing or ignored, clinical decision making becomes less effective and the quality of care you are providing diminishes. That’s why it’s so important to consider the broader context, including how recent political shifts – regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum – have influenced the way we understand, access and apply evidence in healthcare today.
Since arriving in office back in 2016, the Trump Administration has issued executive decisions that pose a serious threat to one of the EBM elements – Best Evidence. And if you’re thinking that it doesn’t matter because we’re in Canada, think again. These decisions have implications on a global scale.
Politicization and Decimation of Public Health Agencies
Public health is a pretty self-explanatory concept – it’s all about the protection of people in the community, aimed at promoting healthy behaviours, preventing disease and protecting the public. In Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Health Canada work together to keep us healthy. The United States has several agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), among others.
When public health agencies and departments are politicized, the credibility of health recommendations can be undermined, leading to public mistrust, confusion among healthcare providers, and challenges in maintaining evidence-based practice.
In December of 2017, The Washington Post reported that the CDC was given a list of words that were forbidden, including “evidence-based” and “science-based”.2 I don’t know about you, but personally I don’t think a person who doesn’t trust the word science instills a lot of confidence. Back in the 2020, Trump-appointed HHS officials tried to block the CDC from releasing data in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) because the administration believed the CDC used language that could hurt the president’s chances for re-election.3 Thousands of public health officials rely on that report to inform their own practice and decisions in their communities.
More recently, in the early months of 2025, Trump gutted key health agencies, slashing funding and firing staff at an alarming rate. Newly appointed Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that 10 thousand jobs were being cut at HHS alone. Additional cuts were reported at the CDC, the FDA, and the Agency for Health Research and Quality, which lost half its staff.4
Among those who were unceremoniously fired was Carrie Price (not that Carey Price, Habs fans…), a Biomedical Librarian at the National Institutes of Health. Her post on LinkedIn went viral, with hundreds of librarians who work with clinicians supporting her and sounding the alarm about the importance of librarians for founding sound research.
Public health works best when smart, dedicated people — researchers, clinicians, librarians, and public health officials — have the tools and support they need to keep us safe. When funding gets slashed and expertise gets sidelined, it’s not just bad for science — it’s bad for everyone. Evidence-based practice relies on good information, and good information doesn’t just appear out of thin air. It’s built by teams of people working behind the scenes, often quietly and carefully, to make sure what you hear from your doctor, pharmacist, or public health office is actually trustworthy.
Changes in Research Priorities and Funding
Politics doesn’t just shape laws; it also shapes what kind of science is conducted. When federal funding priorities shift, so do research agendas at health agencies. One administration might pour money into a certain disease, while the next focuses almost entirely on another, or cuts programs altogether. An administration’s research priorities play a role in which questions get answered, which problems get solved, and which communities get left behind.
The Trump administration has never been a fan of climate change. The words themselves make people in the White House duck for cover. Through a series of executive decisions, Trump has pulled back climate change funding, withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and rolling back pollution and fossil fuel regulations, a decision which has major implications for respiratory diseases and weather-related health crises.5
Another thing the Trump administration doesn’t like: gender. They have made it very clear that they will not be spending money on research related to sexual and gender minorities, putting the health of these groups at risk. All transgender-related research was halted at the NIH6 and suddenly, scientists like Theo Beltrán and Jace Flatt, who have spent decades dedicating their lives to these fields, found themselves in limbo.
So what does this have to do with evidence-based medicine? A lot, actually. EBM depends on having high-quality, up-to-date research to guide decisions. But if certain areas of science aren’t being funded, that evidence might not exist in the first place. If climate-related health risks or gender-related topics aren’t being studied, clinicians are left with gaps in the evidence and that makes it harder to give patients the best possible care. If the research isn’t there, the “best available evidence” part of EBM starts to fall apart.
Inconsistent Guidelines
A clinical practice guideline is a set of evidence-based recommendations designed to help healthcare professionals make informed decisions. They’re developed by experts, who systematically review the best available evidence to help guide clinicians to what’s most likely to work, what to look for, alternate options, etc. They help with the standardization of care in that they ensure that patients receive consistent and high-quality treatment no matter where they are and who is treating them. But what happens when these guidelines collide with politics?
Reproductive healthcare is a prime example. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, clinicians in many U.S. states have found themselves caught between evidence-based recommendations and restrictive state laws. In some cases, treatment for miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies has been delayed out of fear of legal repercussions, even when the medical guidelines are clear and the patient’s health is at risk.7
Organizations like The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the World Health Organization (WHO) continue to publish guidance that supports timely, patient-centered care, but in politically charged environments, following those recommendations isn’t always possible. The result is a broken system where the quality of care can depend more on geography than science, a situation that undermines the very foundation of evidence-based medicine.
While these developments are happening south of the border, they still have implications here in Canada. Canadian clinicians and researchers often rely on U.S.-based studies, guidelines, and collaborations. When reproductive health research is restricted or politicized in the U.S., it can slow progress for everyone. Even though abortion remains legal in Canada, access varies widely by province, and we’re not immune to political pressure. These moments remind us how important it is to protect evidence-based guidelines and ensure healthcare decisions stay grounded in science, not ideology.
Final Thoughts
At the heart of it, evidence-based medicine is about trust — trust that the research behind our care is solid, that guidelines are grounded in good data, and that health decisions are made with patients’ well-being in mind. Librarians are a big part of that picture: we help students learn how to find reliable evidence, support clinicians in staying current, and quietly make sure the information pipeline runs smoothly. When politics starts to mess with science, things can get murky.
The good news is that there are still a lot of people, from researchers to clinicians to librarians, working hard to keep the evidence strong and the science honest! Even when it might seem like we’re on shaky ground, the foundation of EBM is still standing — and we’re here to help keep it that way.
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 312(7023), 71–72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 ↩︎
Sun, L. H., & Eilperin, J. (2017). CDC gets list of forbidden words: Fetus, transgender, diversity: Agency analysts are told to avoid these 7 banned words and phrases in budget documents. Washington, D.C. ↩︎
Dyer, O. (2020). Trump appointees tamper with renowned CDC publication, claiming that scientists are trying to “hurt the president”. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 370, 1–2. ↩︎
Looi, M.-K. (2025). Trump’s 10 000 job cuts spark chaos in US health services. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 389, r682. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r682 ↩︎
Wagatsuma, K. (2025). Implications of President Trump’s Second Term Executive Orders on Global and Public Health. International Journal of Public Health, 70. https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2025.1608402 ↩︎
Kozlov, M. Exclusive: Trump White House directs NIH to study’regret’after transgender people transition. Nature. ↩︎
Roper, K. L., Robbins, S. J., Day, P., Shih, G., & Kale, N. (2024). Impact of State Abortion Policies on Family Medicine Practice and Training After Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Annals of Family Medicine, 22(6), 492–501. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3183 ↩︎
Every year, a team at the National Library of Medicine (NLM) in Bethesda, Maryland, reviews their subject headings to ensure accuracy, relevancy and timeliness. This includes purging the list of outdated terms, adding any new terms that they’ve deemed important (think, Covid in 2020…), and updating the language of terms. To date, there are over 30,000 MeSH terms to choose from! Let’s take a look at some of the new additions:
Mother Earth: Other than replacing the words peas, lettuce, chicory and ginger with their government names (Pisum sativum, Lactuca, Cichorium intybus and Zingiber officinale, respectively, in case you were wondering), the NLM has done some work surrounding the environment and climate change. They’ve added the term Climate Anxiety (the “persistent and difficult to control psychological distress over climate change” that you feel, too, right?) and updated terms to include severe phenomena that are becoming all too common, like Wildfires. I wonder if walking in a forest will cure any of my anxiety? I should search PubMed! And when I do, I’ll be sure to include the new Forest Therapy MeSH term in my search string.
Focus on People: There has been a move towards describing professions in terms of the people who do them, not just the discipline itself. Believe it or not, until recently, Psychologists was not its own MeSH term. The same goes for Personal Trainers, Frontline Workers and Opticians. They’ve also expanded the list of people in general to include those that might require care or present differently because of their occupations (Truck Drivers), because of immunization status (Unvaccinated Persons), or because of social circumstances (Battered Men).
As far as important changes go, the NLM tries to keep up with updated terminology. Language changes rapidly, and as we learn and become more sensitive and inclusive in our everyday communications, the language we use to describe articles should reflect that growth. Here are some noteworthy changes:
OLD TERM
UPDATED TERM
Disabled Persons
Persons with Disabilities
Persons with Mental Disabilities
Persons with Intellectual Disabilities
Sex Reassignment Procedures
Gender-Affirming Procedures
Sex Reassignment Surgery
Gender-Affirming Surgery
Homeless Persons
Ill-Housed Persons
Surrogate Mothers
Gestational Carriers
Pregnant Women
Pregnant People
Have you come across a MeSH term that you think needs changing? Or have you tried to find a MeSH term that doesn’t exist but you think it should? The NLM welcomes feedback! You can make suggestions here.
Still not sure why you should be searching using subject headings? We have a page for you! Check out the McGill Libraries Health Sciences Research Tips to get the answer to that question and many more!
What’s my favourite MeSH term, you ask? This year, MeSH added a term for Lacrosse. For all your lacrosse-related research. It’s not so much the term, but the fact that the NLM took the time to research the sport and include the rules in the definition. I’ve seen diseases described with less accuracy. Big lacrosse fans over at the National Library of Medicine, it seems…
Welcome back to campus! We hope you enjoyed your summer and are ready for another great semester! How was our summer? So great, thanks for asking! We got some reading done and want to share our favourites with you! All these books are available to borrow through our catalog. While you’re on campus, stop by the Schulich Library and take a look at some of our other picks!
Suggested by Andrea Quaiattini, Health Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Medicine, Postgraduate Medical Education and Indigenous Health
“There is grandeur in this view of life… if you can’t see, shame on you.”
“David Starr Jordan was a taxonomist, a man possessed with bringing order to the natural world. In time, he would be credited with discovering nearly a fifth of the fish known to humans in his day. But the more of the hidden blueprint of life he uncovered, the harder the universe seemed to try to thwart him. His specimen collections were demolished by lightning, by fire, and eventually by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake—which sent more than a thousand of his discoveries, housed in fragile glass jars, plummeting to the floor. In an instant, his life’s work was shattered. Many might have given up, given in to despair. But Jordan? He surveyed the wreckage at his feet, found the first fish he recognized, and confidently began to rebuild his collection. And this time, he introduced one clever innovation that he believed would at last protect his work against the chaos of the world.”
Suggested by Tara Mawhinney, Physical Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences, and Civil and Mechanical Engineering
“In her acclaimed novels, Susan Vreeland has given us portraits of painting and life that are as dazzling as their artistic subjects. Now, in The Forest Lover she traces the courageous life and career of Emily Carr, who, more than Georgia O’Keeffe or Frida Kahlo, blazed a path for modern women artists. Overcoming the confines of Victorian culture, Carr became a major force in modern art by capturing an untamed British Columbia and its indigenous peoples just before industrialization changed them forever. From illegal potlatches in tribal communities to artists studios in pre World War I Paris, Vreeland tells her story with gusto and suspense, giving us a glorious novel that will appeal to lovers of art, native cultures, and lush historical fiction.”
“Maybe that’s what love was — walking willingly into the unknown for the sake of the other.”
Suggest by Sabine Calleja, Health Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Nursing and Palliative Care
“The Sackler name adorns the walls of many storied institutions: Harvard, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Oxford, the Louvre. They are one of the richest families in the world, known for their lavish donations to the arts and sciences. The source of the family fortune was vague, however, until it emerged that the Sacklers were responsible for making and marketing OxyContin, a blockbuster painkiller that was a catalyst for the opioid crisis.”
“The opioid crisis is, among other things, a parable about the awesome capability of private industry to subvert public institutions.”
Suggested by Maryam DeyhimiHaghighi, Senior Library Clerk
“Sethe, its protagonist, was born a slave and escaped to Ohio, but eighteen years later she is still not free. She has too many memories of Sweet Home, the beautiful farm where so many hideous things happened. And Sethe’s new home is haunted by the ghost of her baby, who died nameless and whose tombstone is engraved with a single word: Beloved. Filled with bitter poetry and suspense as taut as a rope, Beloved is a towering achievement by Nobel Prize laureate Toni Morrison.”
“Freeing yourself was one thing, claiming ownership of that freed self was another.”
Suggested by Andrea Miller-Nesbitt, Life Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Anatomy & Cell Biology, Biochemistry, Biology, Environment and Genetics
My home is full of hope and ghosts.
“Off the reserve and trying to find ways to live and love in the big city, Jonny becomes a cybersex worker who fetishizes himself in order to make a living. Self-ordained as an NDN glitter princess, Jonny has one week before he must return to the “rez,” and his former life, to attend the funeral of his stepfather. The next seven days are like a fevered dream: stories of love, trauma, sex, kinship, ambition, and the heartbreaking recollection of his beloved kokum (grandmother). Jonny’s world is a series of breakages, appendages, and linkages–and as he goes through the motions of preparing to return home, he learns how to put together the pieces of his life.”
“A young woman moves from the place of her birth to the remote northern country of her forebears to be housekeeper to her brother, whose wife has recently left him. Soon after her arrival, a series of inexplicable events occurs – collective bovine hysteria; the demise of a ewe and her nearly born lamb; a local dog’s phantom pregnancy; a potato blight. She notices that the local suspicion about incomers in general seems to be directed with some intensity at her and she senses a mounting threat that lies ‘just beyond the garden gate.’ And as she feels the hostility growing, pressing at the edges of her brother’s property, she fears that, should the rumblings in the town gather themselves into a more defined shape, who knows what might happen, what one might be capable of doing.”
It’s not the meek who inherit the earth. The meek get kicked in the teeth.
Suggested by April Colosimo, Physical Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Math, Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy
The world is changing, you know. A pity you aren’t ready to live in it.
“Shizuka Satomi made a deal with the to escape damnation, she must entice seven other violin prodigies to trade their souls for success. She has already delivered six. When Katrina Nguyen, a young transgender runaway, catches Shizuka’s ear with her wild talent, Shizuka can almost feel the curse lifting. She’s found her final candidate. But in a donut shop off a bustling highway in the San Gabriel Valley, Shizuka meets Lan Tran, retired starship captain, interstellar refugee, and mother of four. Shizuka doesn’t have time for crushes or coffee dates, what with her very soul on the line, but Lan’s kind smile and eyes like stars might just redefine a soul’s worth. And maybe something as small as a warm donut is powerful enough to break a curse as vast as the California coastline. As the lives of these three women become entangled by chance and fate, a story of magic, identity, curses, and hope begins, and a family worth crossing the universe for is found.”
Suggested by Eleni Philippopoulos, Health Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Undergraduate Medicine and LGBTQ+ Health
You’re gonna let the world happen to you, and you’re gonna love it.
“In the male-dominated field of animation, Mel Vaught and Sharon Kisses are a dynamic duo, the friction of their differences driving them: Sharon, quietly ambitious but self-doubting; Mel, brash and unapologetic, always the life of the party. Best friends and artistic partners since the first week of college, where they bonded over their working-class roots and obvious talent, they spent their twenties ensconced in a gritty Brooklyn studio. Working, drinking, laughing. Drawing: Mel, to understand her tumultuous past, and Sharon, to lose herself altogether.
Now, after a decade of striving, the two are finally celebrating the release of their first full-length feature, which transforms Mel’s difficult childhood into a provocative and visually daring work of art. The toast of the indie film scene, they stand at the cusp of making it big. But with their success come doubt and destruction, cracks in their relationship threatening the delicate balance of their partnership. Sharon begins to feel expendable, suspecting that the ever-more raucous Mel is the real artist. During a trip to Sharon’s home state of Kentucky, the only other partner she has ever truly known—her troubled, charismatic childhood best friend, Teddy—reenters her life, and long-buried resentments rise to the surface, hastening a reckoning no one sees coming.”
Suggested by Jill Boruff, Health Sciences Librarian, Liaison for Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Psychiatry and Communication Sciences & Disorders
“France, 1714: in a moment of desperation, a young woman makes a Faustian bargain to live forever and is cursed to be forgotten by everyone she meets. Thus begins the extraordinary life of Addie LaRue, and a dazzling adventure that will play out across centuries and continents, across history and art, as a young woman learns how far she will go to leave her mark on the world. But everything changes when, after nearly 300 years, Addie stumbles across a young man in a hidden bookstore and he remembers her name.”
What is a person, if not the marks they leave behind?
Happy Pride, all! Did you know that members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community are more likely to experience health disparities than their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts?1 Many members of this community say they feel uncomfortable accessing healthcare and report facing discrimination because of who they are.2 Not on our watch!
The Wendy Patrick Consumer Health Collection has books to help members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community take their health into their own hands. Here is a sample of some the books in our collection:
“As a gay man living in London and working as a nutritionist, Daniel O’Shaughnessy knows that the LGBTQ+ community has specific dietary and health needs. Yet while there is huge demand for this kind of information in his private practice, there is very little reliable public information out there for the community to access. Naked Nutrition seeks to change that: it is the first LGBTQ+ focused guide to diet and lifestyle, taking an honest, inclusive and non-judgemental approach to the questions Daniel is asked most frequently. It covers a wide range of subjects, giving detailed, practical advice on matters including: weight loss and muscle gain, digestive health issues, addiction, sex, fertility, nutrition for balancing hormones while transitioning, how to eat if you have a chronic condition, and how to mitigate against the party lifestyle.”
“Like a Boy but Not a Boy explores author andrea bennett’s experiences with gender expectations, being a non-binary parent, and the sometimes funny and sometimes difficult task of living in a body. The book’s fourteen essays also delve incisively into the interconnected themes of mental illness, mortality, creative work, class, and bike mechanics (apparently you can learn a lot about yourself through truing a wheel).”
“Have you ever questioned your gender identity? Do you know somebody who is transgender or who identifies as non-binary? Do you ever feel confused when people talk about gender diversity? This down-to-earth guide is for anybody who wants to know more about gender, from its biology, history, and sociology to the role it plays in our relationships and interactions with family, friends, partners, and strangers. Activities throughout the book will engage people of all genders in a thoughtful, practical way, and help you understand people whose gender might be different from your own.”
“How do I know if I’m actually asexual? How do i come out as asexual? What kinds of relationships can I have as an ace person? If you are looking for answers to these questions, Cody is here to help. Within these pages lie all the advice you need as a questioning ace teen. Tackling everything from what asexuality is, the asexual spectrum, and tips on coming out, to intimacy, relationships, aphobia, and finding joy, this guide will help you better understand your asexual identity alongside deeply relatable anecdotes drawn from Cody’s personal experience. Whether you are ace, demi, gray-ace, or not sure yet, this book will give you the courage and confidence to embrace your unique self.”
“With personal stories and illustrations throughout, this comprehensive resource will help you understand the full range of surgical options available. Information and advice about each procedure is offered, including planning and recovery, sexual health and fertility, and insight into what to expect in the years following an operation. This is essential reading for any trans or non-binary person considering gender confirmation surgery and will help you make the decision that’s right for you”
“Alo Johnston has been where you are. From watching every transition story on YouTube and navigating online message boards for answers to finally starting testosterone and transitioning himself, he now walks alongside you every step of the way to guide you towards acceptance of who you truly are. Born out of thousands of hours of research and conversations with hundreds of trans people, Am I Trans Enough? digs deep into internalized transphobia and the historical narratives that fuel it. It unveils what happens after you come out, or begin questioning living as a trans person, in a world that works against you. Use this book as a space to engage with your fears and explore your doubts without the pressure of needing to be a perfect trans representative. If you are just beginning your trans journey, are twenty years into transition or have no idea if you are even trans at all, this book will help you to become your most authentic self”
You can check out these books and many others on the main floor of the library. You can also visit our catalog to browse more titles in the Wendy Patrick Consumer Health Collection.
Alliance for Healthier Communities. 2SLGBTQ+. (n.d.). Retrieved June 7, 2024, from https://www.allianceon.org/2SLGBTQ#:~:text=Two%20Spirit%2C%20Lesbian%2C%20Gay %2C,to%20stigma%2C%20discrimination%20and%20social ↩︎
Mills, S., Dion, M., Thompson-Blum, D., Borst, C., & Diemert, J. (2019). Mapping the Void: Two-Spirit and LGBTIQ+ Experiences in Hamilton. ↩︎
Sometimes, the search process happens backwards. What I mean by that is that you may find yourself with a stack of articles that you know you want to include in your review, but are then tasked with coming up with the search that will generate these articles and articles like them. The Yale MeSH Analyzer is here to facilitate the task and help you come up with a great list of search terms.
Developed by the team at the Yale University Cushing/Whitney Medical Library, this tool allows you to analyze those perfect articles and extract the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and keywords. This is definitely quicker than scanning each article manually.
Here’s how it works! You’ll be asked to enter the PubMed Identification Numbers (PMIDs) for your articles. You can find these on the individual article pages on PubMed:
You can enter up to 20 PMIDs at once for the tool to analyze. Once you’ve entered all your articles, the Yale MeSH analyzer will spit out a handy table, either online or in an downloadable Excel sheet, that allows you to see what MeSH terms the articles have been tagged with. And, despite what the name suggests, it isn’t limited to MeSH terms. The tool will also give you a list of keywords that the authors have used to describe their own articles.
Let’s take a look at an example: A student is interested in looking at experiences of young menstruating individuals in low-income countries and rural areas. She has managed to find four articles through her limited Google search, but would like to build a more comprehensive search in a few medical databases.
Want to follow along? Access the Yale MeSH Analyzer here. The PMIDs of the articles are as follows:
30611223
24244435
29485336
26436841
This is what the MeSH Analyzer produces for her (click on the image to enlarge it):
All four of the articles are tagged with the MeSH term Menstruation, so that’s a pretty good indication that our student should include it in her search! But one of the articles is also tagged with Menarche and that’s something that our student hadn’t thought to include. Other MeSH terms to think about are Rural Populations, Sanitation and Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice.
The author keywords are also telling:
One article mentions Menstrual hygiene management and the other Menstrual hygieneproducts. This gives you insight into the various ways different researchers are referring to the same concept. In addition, it allows you to parse your search. Instead of writing every iteration, you can choose to just add menstrual hygiene as a term to ensure that you’re picking up all the varieties.
Congratulations! You now have a great foundation on which to build your search!
In a previous blog post, we discussed the use of ChatGPT for PubMed searches. Now that Gemini, previously Bard from Google, has become available in Canada, it’s worth taking a look at how the technology interprets requests for PubMed searches and how it differs from ChatGPT.
We’ll be using the exact same example that we used previously:
In former smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, is pulmonary rehabilitation an effective treatment method?
When asked to generate a MeSH only search string, this is what the program comes up with:
("Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease"[Mesh] AND "Pulmonary Rehabilitation"[Mesh]) AND ("Exp-Smokers"[Mesh] AND "Smoking Cessation"[Mesh]) [Optional: AND "Treatment Outcome"[Mesh]]
It seems like all AI programs share a brain cell when it comes to MeSH. Like ChatGPT, Gemini is making up its own MeSH terms – Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Chronic ObstructivePulmonary Disease are not MeSH terms! It has also included Exp-Smokers, when the correct MeSH term is Ex-Smokers. Yikes.
Another obvious issue is the use of AND to combine “Exp-Smokers”[Mesh] and “Smoking Cessation”[Mesh]. In the context of this question, these are synonyms, part of the same concept, and would therefore be combined using OR.
Let’s take a look at Gemini’s response as a whole:
While ChatGPT just spits out MeSH terms, Gemini seems to take it one step further and offer advice. The use of Required and Optional is presumptuous, but I can appreciate that the program tries to explain what kind of articles your query will return.
The biggest problem, and the one I take the most issue with, is the program’s declaration that adding the MeSH term Treatment Outcome will broaden your search. While Treatment Outcome might be a broad term, including this MeSH term will severely narrow your search and potentially eliminate relevant articles. The more concepts you combine using the Boolean operator AND, the less results you will end up with.
When asked to generate a list of keywords, Gemini provided one or two synonyms for each concept, even though we know from the complete search we generated in the last post that there are way more out there:
If you’re going to be using any AI program to generate synonyms, it’s best to enter your terms one at a time, and only after you’ve combed through other sources, like relevant journal articles or a thesaurus.
Gemini is also struggling with the concept of Booleans. The search string it generates is riddled with Boolean errors:
(COPD OR ex-smoker) AND pulmonary rehabilitation AND (exercise training OR dyspnea OR quality of life)
My head hurts just looking at this… I’ve used different colours to group together keywords of the same concept. COPD and ex-smoker are two entirely different concepts and should not be grouped together. If exercise training is often used in conjunction with pulmonary rehabilitation like Gemini says, then why is it not being combined using OR? Presumably, Gemini thinks that dyspnea and quality of life are important outcomes, so the use of OR to combine them is not false, but it shouldn’t have grouped exercise training with them. Overall, it’s a mess.
One thing that I think Gemini does better than ChatGPT is the explanation for searching both MeSH terms and keywords, and I trust it more as a learning tool than as a search string generator:
If you’re still not sure why you should complement your MeSH terms with appropriate keywords, take a look at our Health Sciences FAQ.
By now you’re probably thinking, “Gee, I don’t think Gemini could possibly get any more wrong.” Well, BUCKLE UP! I asked Gemini how to exclude keywords, wanting to know how it would explain the Boolean operator NOT:
Here, Gemini is telling you that instead of using NOT, you can simply use AND – to exclude a term. That’s not how that works! Booleans are sacred! They’re as old as time itself! You can’t just go around changing them! PubMed’s own User Guide warns that the minus sign (-) is converted to a space. Consequently, if you wanted to retrieve articles that mention COPD but not bronchitis, Gemini would have you type this: (“COPD” AND – “Bronchitis”). But PubMed isn’t interpreting this search the way Gemini thinks it is:
PubMed is ignoring your minus, turning it into a space, and searching instead for articles that mention both COPD and bronchitis. The correct way to exclude bronchitis is by entering: “COPD” NOT “bronchitis”.
I’m not ready to give you my blessing to generate searches using ChatGPT or Gemini. Maybe one day we’ll get there, but for now, I think I’ve demonstrated why you shouldn’t trust either of these tools with the job. The good news is that if you’re struggling with searching in PubMed or other medical databases, your librarians are here to help you! Contact us with any questions relating to searches and databases.
/2025/Communications/Graphics/Digital%20screens/QHM%202025_Keynote_16x9.png?e=4%3ae64dcd6cd92b42c5a133de7f5ae1b824&web=1&sharingv2=true&fromShare=true&at=9&CID=8a881348-288f-4002-8eab-5d876ce80e82)
