Remembering Donald A. B. Lindberg, a visionary giant with a personal touch

Along with the 1,700 women and men of the National Library of Medicine (NLM), I am saddened at the death of Donald A. B. Lindberg, M.D. (September 21, 1933-August 16, 2019), director of the NLM for more than 30 years.  

A world-renowned leader in applying computers to health care and a giant in the field of biomedical research, he was hailed for his visionary and transformative leadership. When people talk about people with such great influence, they often say that those who come after them stand on their shoulders. With Don, it was different. He made sure that we stood beside him.  

Like many of you, I believe I had a relationship with Don that had nothing to do with me as a person, but everything to do with the personhood of “DABL.” Don had a way of making each of us feel chosen to be in his orbit and making you feel as if he singled you out as a winner—and he thought we all were winners!

Throughout the years, Don reinforced the feeling that I stood beside a giant, not on his shoulders.

Let me share a few memories that illustrate this point.

In the mid-1990s, Don recognized the importance of the patient as part of the health information ecosystem. He realized that changing the health care system couldn’t only be the job of health professionals, but that patient engagement was key and that it involved many disciplines, so he created committees to guide NLM’s long range planning efforts. He made sure that young people like me, who had strong research programs to address patient engagement, were part of the process.

In 2002, as I launched my sabbatical at NLM, Don and his wife, Mary, invited me and my son, Conor, to their home. I can still picture Don and my then-nine-year-old son splashing in their pool. The Lindbergs took the time to share their home with me, a kindness that my son and I will never forget.

When I became NLM director in August 2016, Don and Mary hosted a lovely party for me. They introduced me to so many people important to the Library with whom I wouldn’t have met so early in my tenure. Their warm welcome made me feel anointed as a person of importance to them and as a part of the next generation of NLM.

And as I prepared to attend my first Friends of the National Library of Medicine gala later that year, I told Don that I was looking forward to seeing him. His response was that he wouldn’t be attending; He said, “This is your time to shine. I will come back next year.” And so, he did—to the gala and to lectures, celebrations, and many professional events. He and his wife remained a strong presence in the life of the Library. Mary was not only Don’s wife, she was a hospice nurse with a professional practice and a strong advocate in her own right.

Don left his legacy in so many ways, including the annual Donald A.B. Lindberg and Donald West King Lecture to be held September 12 at NLM. Edward Feigenbaum, a pioneer in the development of expert systems in artificial intelligence (AI) and in demonstrating its technological significance, will be speaking. I’d like to think Don would be pleased.  

As I sit in the same office where Don worked, I pledge to take forward the integrity and commitment that Don demonstrated in leading this great institution. It’s not only what he would want, it’s what he would expect.

Dr. Donald Lindberg with grandson, Martin, in his NLM office.
Dr. Donald Lindberg with grandson, Martin, in his NLM office, ca. 1999.

Engaging Users to Support the Modernization of ClinicalTrials.gov

Guest post by Rebecca Williams, PharmD, MPH, acting director of ClinicalTrials.gov at the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

ClinicalTrials.gov is the largest public clinical research registry and results database in the world – providing patients, health care providers, and researchers with information on more than 300,000 clinical studies of a wide range of diseases and conditions. More than 145,000 unique visitors use the public website daily to find and learn about clinical studies, resulting in an average of 215 million pageviews each month.

Recognizing the value of ClinicalTrials.gov to millions of users, the Board of Regents of the National Library of Medicine (NLM) described in the 2017-2027 strategic plan the importance of ensuring the long-term sustainability of this resource. NLM is committed to this goal and aims to modernize ClinicalTrials.gov to deliver a modern user experience on a flexible, extensible, scalable, and sustainable platform that will accommodate growth and enhance efficiency.

We are undertaking this effort to make ClinicalTrials.gov an even more valuable resource with a renewed commitment to engage with and serve the people who rely on it.

These users include the sponsors and investigators who submit clinical trial information for inclusion on the site through the submission portal. They also include patients, health care providers, and researchers who access listed information on ClinicalTrials.gov, whether directly or indirectly through other sites and services that use the ClinicalTrials.gov application programming interface.

Over the past several years, we have conducted testing with users and have already made some improvements in response to this feedback. With modernization, we will continue to support key functions identified by users of ClinicalTrials.gov while also seeking ways to make it an even more valuable resource.

To continue the modernization process, we are now seeking broader engagement with users to further help us determine how to evolve ClinicalTrials.gov. We are spending this summer looking inward by engaging our fellow National Institutes of Health Institutes and Centers to understand how ClinicalTrials.gov could better help in fulfilling NIH’s goals of clinical trial stewardship and transparency

This fall, we plan to expand our reach outward and are proposing to establish a working group of the NLM Board of Regents to focus on the modernization of ClinicalTrials.gov. This working group will provide a transparent forum for communicating and receiving input about efforts to enrich and modernize ClinicalTrials.gov. We want to ensure that we understand and consider changing needs while simultaneously maximizing the value of the growing amount of available information and preserving the integrity of ClinicalTrials.gov as a trusted resource.

We’ve already taken some steps to be more proactive in communicating with our users. We just launched “Hot Off the PRS!” (sign up to receive email announcements), a new informational bulletin for users of the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS). These updates provide timely announcements about new PRS features, relevant regulations (42 CFR Part 11) and policies, and information about other offerings such as the PRS Guided Tutorials (BETA), a new training resource with step-by-step instructions for submitting results information.

We’re excited about how greater user engagement will enrich and modernize ClinicalTrials.gov, improving its value for everyone throughout the clinical research lifecycle.

Please let us know what else we can do to make ClinicalTrials.gov the best it can be.

Photo of Rebecca Williams, PharmD, MPH

Rebecca Williams, PharmD, MPH, oversees the technical, scientific, policy, regulatory and outreach activities related to the operation of ClinicalTrials.gov. Her research interests relate to improving the quality of reporting of clinical research and evaluating the clinical research enterprise.

On the Importance of Mentors (and Mentors Who Become Friends)

The best mentors not only provide a sounding board to try out new ideas and thoughts, they also give you the confidence to ride new waves of opportunity. But sometimes mentors become something more: They become your lifelong friends.

That’s the way it’s been for me with Jon White, MD.

I’ve been blessed with many mentors and many friends, but this is a good time for me to reflect on my relationship with Jon because he just announced that he is leaving his post at the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC). Jon will become the associate chief of staff of research at the Department of Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Health Care System.

I’ve known Jon for more than a decade, first in his role as the director of the Health Information Technology (IT) Portfolio at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and then in his role at ONC. We’ve served on committees together, pushed the national health IT agenda, and commiserated when the promise of automation fell short, once again, of what health care needed.

Jon was ONC’s lead for the Precision Medicine Initiative from 2014 to 2017, and he contributed significantly to the IT provisions of the 21st Century Cures Act. He solicited broad consultative input on the nation’s health IT agenda, engaging the JASON advisory group to inform the direction of artificial intelligence and patient participation, and served as co-chair of the Health IT Standards Committee, which was established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

It would take more space than this blog post to detail Jon’s accomplishments as a federal leader in the health IT space, which would detract from what I want you to know about Jon as a mentor who became my friend.

Like the best mentors, Jon challenged my thinking. During hallway conversations and AHRQ council meetings, Jon pushed me to consider how IT could better support patient participation in health care. He pointed me toward funding opportunities, and before the term “manel” was commonly used to describe all-male speaking panels, he invited me to participate on deliberation panels and key committees.

As I weighed the pros and cons of taking what turned out to be this outstanding opportunity to direct the National Library of Medicine, Jon provided me with sound advice, pointing out the opportunities and challenges I might find in a federal position.

My friendship with Jon is a special gift that reflects not so much the quality of his mentorship but an evolution of our relationship. And when you become friends, there is a mutuality that doesn’t really exist in a mentor-mentee relationship.

As Jon moves on, I hope he carries the gift of this mentorship that turned into a friendship into the next stage of his life, and I hope you’ll be inspired to reach out to the mentors and friends in your life.  

Click here for more Musings on mentors.

Accelerating Innovation in Science

Fast.

Healthcare.

Interoperability.

Resource.

Word about HL7 FHIR—pronounced “fire”—is spreading quickly across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and scientific community, and for good reason.

The FHIR format is a global industry standard for exchanging health care data between institutions. Most electronic health records systems in hospitals and physicians’ offices already use FHIR to send and receive critical information for patient care and to support billing for patient services. With proper oversight and human subjects’ protection, clinical research and scientific advancement can benefit from FHIR. Data is becoming increasingly important for biomedical research, including predictive phenotyping and the conduct of clinical trials. 

NIH is taking steps to promote the use of FHIR in its funded clinical research to facilitate data access and promote interoperability of research data while protecting patient privacy and ensuring consistency with informed consent.

This afternoon, Clem McDonald, MD, Chief Health Data Standards Officer at the National Library of Medicine (NLM) at NIH, announced two notices issued today by NIH regarding FHIR at the Blue Button 2.0 Developer Conference held at the White House Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC.

The Guide Notice on FHIR  encourages NIH-funded investigators to explore the use of FHIR to capture, integrate, and exchange clinical data for research purposes and to enhance capabilities to share research data. The Notice aims to make all NIH-funded researchers aware of the emerging ability to extract data from electronic health records using FHIR and encourage them to use FHIR-compatible formats when sharing data, consistent with privacy restrictions and informed consent. Following this notice, NIH will soon solicit input from the scientific community and other stakeholders about the tools that might be needed to support use of FHIR in biomedical research, as well as implementation challenges and opportunities they foresee in using FHIR. 

To complement the research component, NIH also posted a Notice of Special Interest to inform the small business innovation research and small business technology transfer communities of NIH’s interest in supporting applications that use FHIR in the development of health information technology products and services. NIH is interested in the implementation of the FHIR standard in health IT applications, such as the integration of patient- and population-level data from electronic health records systems, access to and management of electronic health information, the development of clinical decision support systems, the enhancement of recruitment into clinical trials, and improving privacy and security for electronic health information.

These efforts will help implement the NIH Strategic Plan for Data Science and build on activities already under way in individual Institutes and Centers within NIH. The NLM’s new strategic plan positions the NLM as a platform for data powered health, which will lead to the development of new analytics and novel visualization approaches to accelerate discovery-from-data.

As we promote the use of FHIR by our funded researchers and potential developers, institutes and centers across NIH—including the NLM, the National Human Genome Research Institute, and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences—are taking the lead in creating and using FHIR APIs in various research domains. Ongoing and emerging efforts aim to improve the retrieval of genomic and phenotypic data from the NIH database of genotypes and phenotypes, integrate data from genetic test results into electronic medical records, and prototype the infrastructure needed to query clinical data from partner organizations. Based on what we learn from our engagement with the scientific community, we anticipate supporting development of other tools and resources that can help scientists make better use of FHIR to enhance their research endeavors.

NIH is in a key position to contribute to the development of the research capabilities of FHIR—and we come ready to combine technology, scientific research, and data to make break-through discoveries to improve health.

We’re interested in your experiences and guidance. Come along with us, and let us know how NIH can help you and your researchers make the best use of FHIR.

The Power of 10: Women Leaders of NIH

For the first time in NIH’s history, we have 10 women leading institutes and centers.

Now, when the directors of NIH’s 27 institutes and centers meet, more than a third of our voices are female.

Individually, we bring to leadership our personalities, professional expertise, and personal power.

Together, we bring what I call the “Power of 10.”

We spoke with each leader to hear about her experiences and insights on being a female director of an NIH institute or center. We heard about advocating for more women and diversity, advice for work-life balance, what’s happening at the center- and institute-level in terms of women in leadership, plus a few telling anecdotes, and the three M’s. At the end of this post, I share some of my own thoughts on the “Power of 10.”


Ann Cashion, PhD from NINR

Ann Cashion, Ph.D., R.N., F.A.A.N.
Acting Director
National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)

A seat at the table:
I think presence is important—just being there whether at the scientific directors’ table or the institute directors’ table. Even if you don’t say something, you make others accountable by your presence.

Nursing’s unique path:
By virtue of the demographics of the nursing field, our intramural and extramural leaders are primarily women. Yet, I’m always careful with that because I think diversity goes both ways.


Nora D. Volkow, M.D. from NIDA

Nora D. Volkow, M.D.
Director
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Not taking anything for granted:
Being a woman in an academic environment dominated by males has made me incredibly perseverant. For example, to achieve tenure, I had to have almost double the number of publications that my male colleagues had and to get the highest ratings. That leads you not to take anything for granted.

A shift in perspective:
It’s not that in the past males set off their brain to say, “No, we don’t want women.” It was a system that generated conditions that were not welcoming to women and one that was not questioned for there were very few women that could raise their voices and be taken seriously. The increasing presence of women in academia, including those in leadership, is changing the dialogue as the value of their contributions continuously expands. Women also bring a diversity of perspectives that enriches and strengthens institutions.

Women in leadership positions beget more women leaders:  
Women in leadership serve as an example to other women that this is possible. When someone has demonstrated that something is feasible, it becomes a reality and you don’t question it anymore. I think that this is probably one of the most important ways by which having women as directors of institutes or centers has helped advance the leadership position of women in science.


Diana W. Bianchi, M.D. from NICHD

Diana W. Bianchi, M.D.
Director 
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

Women leaders are on the rise everywhere:
Having had the privilege of testifying at a House Appropriations Subcommittee meeting in April, it was very noticeable to me that nine of the 13 representatives on the committee were women. And indeed, one of the members of Congress was eight months pregnant. This created a perceptible difference in both the tone and the types of questions asked. . . We at NIH are a reflection of diversity that’s occurring in Congress as well. It’s a very exciting time to be here.

NICHD as a leader in women’s health:
So many people think that we focus exclusively on the health of children. We have made a strategic decision to better articulate our focus on women’s reproductive health. About 30 percent of our research portfolio is in reproductive health, and that is primarily in gynecologic health, contraception, and pregnancy-related issues. From a leadership perspective, we have made a decision to increase the support of science not only on disease or atypical conditions but even on menstruation and endometrial biology—what needs to occur for normal health or typical health.

The significance of more women around the table:
By having more women around the table, there’s clearly an opportunity for women’s voices and women’s opinions, but I think it does connect to more of a focus on women’s health.


Andrea T. Norris from NIH CIT

Andrea T. Norris
Director
Center for Information Technology (CIT)

Progress through diversity:
There has been a concentrated push to increase the diversity at NIH—not just male/female, but other backgrounds and ethnic diversities. It makes for better leadership and better management decisions. I see this every day. I give tremendous credit to the NIH leadership for really valuing that diversity. It absolutely makes a difference. And you can’t make much progress without it.

An exciting time for women leaders at NIH:
I encourage women to look at the role of technology in the health sector and in biomedical research as an incredible career opportunity. This is such an exciting time for innovation at the intersection of biomedical, medical, and technology domains. It’s dynamic and fast moving. Whether you have scientific skills, business expertise or know technology, there’s a role—an important role—for you in this space, especially here at NIH.


Judith Cooper, Ph.D. from OD

Judith A. Cooper, Ph.D.
Acting Director
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)

Approaches that allow for healthy work-life balance:
I support a healthy work-life balance through encouraging flexible work schedules and ad hoc teleworking, allowing the voicing of concerns and grievances via an open-door policy, and creating a work environment and meeting style where all and diverse voices around the table are heard.

Advancing and supporting others:
As I advanced in my career at NIH, I tried to bring up deserving individuals with me by offering leadership training opportunities or activities with the potential for advancement, both within and outside NIDCD. As I step down from my year-long stint as acting director, I appreciate the insights and opportunities this role has provided, and I look forward to continuing as deputy director, sharing my experiences with and paving the way for Dr. Debara Tucci, who will be NIH’s newest female IC director when she arrives in September.


Noni Byrnes, PhD from CSR

Noni Byrnes, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Scientific Review (CSR)

An honor and a responsibility:
I was stunned at how many women came up to me when I was selected as the director and told me that they were just thrilled that I had been chosen. I’ve never thought of myself as a role model, so I consider it to be a real honor and responsibility.

On being a leader and a woman of color:
One of the issues that sometimes minorities, and especially women of color, face is the questioning of credentials. I appreciate that it can be pretty damaging to be qualified with significant accomplishments, but then be questioned as to whether or not you got the position because of the boxes that are checked. There’s always a little bit of that. You can spend your time internalizing those negative thoughts, or you can move ahead to advance science and advance the mission.


Martha J. Somerman, DDS, Phd from NIDCR

Martha J. Somerman, D.D.S., Ph.D.
Director
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)

Having a family:
I have talked more to women about having a child and a career. I’ve shared how I read my journal articles out loud to my newborn son. They need to hear your voice. One of the interesting things is that now when I talk about having children, I talk to men, too. The conversations are not necessarily based on gender.

 More women in leadership at NIDCR:
In terms of recruiting for our intramural research, I think we’ve done a great job increasing the number of women in leadership positions over the last five years, and we have diverse research teams. Our institute also offers intramural and extramural fellowships that enhance diversity. It’s an area I pay a lot of attention to. We’re being more proactive.


Helene Langevin, MD from NCCIH

Helene Langevin, M.D.
Director
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)

Re-entering the workforce:
I’m thrilled with what the NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health is doing to help women re-enter scientific professions and research careers after having taken time off for family reasons. I had personal experience with this. I chose to leave academia for six years when my children were babies and was fortunate that I was able to come back with tremendous support from mentors—some women and some men—who helped me re-enter my academic career. But I know how difficult it is and that not all women are as fortunate as I have been. We need to do more to help. I think this can apply to men as well, but women bear a special burden with pregnancy and the actual bearing of children can physically be very hard.

Managing stress and a scientific career:
One of the things that NCCIH is interested in is helping people manage stress. I think being able to manage stress and stay healthy throughout pregnancy, taking care of small children, and pursuing one’s career is difficult. You need help from all directions, but also help from the scientific and academic environment and the funding agencies. . . Advancing one’s scientific career is important, but staying healthy through that process is very important, too.


Linda S. Birnbaum, PhD from NIEHS

Linda S. Birnbaum, Ph.D., D.A.B.T., A.T.S.
Director
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)

On the three M’s:
I think about the three M’s: mentoring, modeling and—you’re going to laugh—mothering.

Mentoring:
In mentoring, it’s extremely important that you mentor more than your students and your postdocs, for example. You mentor people around you and even people above you.

Modeling:
Modeling is setting an example. I’m frustrated by people who think that it’s really great that all they do is work. I can remember years ago when I had three little kids at home and I didn’t take anything home with me because there was no way I could get anything done. I was very efficient when I was at work. I didn’t spend a lot of time chitchatting or going for coffee. The other thing with modeling is taking time off. It’s especially positive for the younger people to see their director out of the office.

Mothering:
And then there’s mothering. . . I really take an interest in the people in my institute. Part of good mothering is knowing when your children need help and letting them make their own mistakes and fly when they’re ready. At work, I let people explore new options.


Patricia Flatley Brennan, RN, PhD from NLM

Patricia Flatley Brennan, R.N., Ph.D.
Director
National Library of Medicine (NLM)

Driving research and discovery:
Engaging with women leaders in partnership with our male colleagues sends a powerful and strong message. It’s not that we stand apart, it’s that we stand among.

We subtly but persistently bring perspective into the conversation at the NIH leadership table. It’s one thing to say that we need to hear the voices of women. It’s another thing to hear them and keep hearing them.

It’s becoming clearer every day that health is a complex interplay of person, environment, biology, and action. Women bring a lateral understanding of how to engage across these four elements to drive research and discovery in a way that improves human health.

The magnificence of magnification:
The “Power of 10” means that each of our contributions to the leadership of NIH are magnified 10 times over.

The Significance of Network Biology

Guest post by Teresa Przytycka, PhD, Senior Investigator, Computational and Systems Biology section of the Computational Biology Branch at the National Library of Medicine’s National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Institutes of Health.

The functioning of any complex system involves interactions between elements of that system. This is true at the cellular level, the macro level, and every point in between.

For example, within a cell, diverse molecules coordinate their activities and work together to carry out specific cellular functions. Cells then interact with each other to shape an organism’s development, tissue-level organization, and immune response. In turn, the organisms themselves interact to form various types of connections. In the case of people, those connections form the backbone of social systems.

These many interactions, from the microscopic to the macroscopic, can be described as networks, which comprise nodes connected via links that designate the relationships between nodes.

But how can we discover which nodes are connected? And how can we learn about the nature of those connections?

My research group and I try to answer these questions using network analysis, that is, working at the network level to uncover insights about the underlying system.

We can trace the beginnings of network analysis (also known as graph theory in mathematical circles) to Gottfried Leibniz’s geometria situs (“geometry of position”), a mathematical discipline focused on the relationship between positions and objects. The first recorded application of this new way of thinking was the famous solution to the problem known as “The Bridges of Königsberg,” published by Leonhard Euler in 1736.

Königsberg (now Kaliningrad) straddles the Pregel River. In Euler’s time, seven bridges connected the various parts of the city, including two islands in the middle of the river. The question asked was whether one could chart a walk through the city that required crossing each bridge only once and return to the start.

Euler tackled this question using what we today call network theory. If the regions of Königsberg are nodes and the bridges are links, Euler showed that, for such a walk to be possible, each node must have an even number of links. Why an even number? Because if we cannot cross the same bridge twice, then for every way into each region of the city there must be a new way out. Because that property did not hold for Königsberg, Euler concluded that no such walk could be devised.

As Euler’s argument shows, representing a complex system as a network of nodes and links can help uncover properties of the system that might have otherwise been obscured.

In biology and medicine, such network-centric approaches coincided with the emergence of high-throughput experimental techniques and advanced methods for collecting and storing diverse biomedical data. The protein interaction network for yeast became one of the first large biological networks obtained from high-throughput experiments. Analyzing that network revealed that a small fraction of proteins interacted with a disproportionately large number of other proteins. Additional research showed that these “hub” proteins are essential to the cell’s survival.

This intriguing relationship between a network property and a biological property begged for an explanation.

Our 2008 paper demonstrated that the majority of protein hubs are essential because of their involvement in complex, densely connected modules that carry out functions essential for cell survival. These results illustrate that, in addition to reporting binary relationships between individual nodes, interaction networks encode hidden higher-level organization.

In many networks, including biological and social ones, groups of nodes that interact with each other more tightly than with the rest of the network can be identified. We call these groups “modules.” In the context of biological networks, modules are often associated with groups of genes that work together to perform a specific biological function. At the same time, we’re beginning to see that complex diseases, such as cancer, are more likely caused by the dysregulation of a specific functional module than a dysfunction of an individual gene. That’s why, in recent years, cancer research has turned its attention to identifying dysregulated modules.

This effort includes several methods developed by our research group—Module Cover, Mutual Exclusivity Module Cover, and BeWith. These methods combine information from the human-interaction network with disease-specific information, such as abnormally expressed or mutated genes, to identify disease-associated modules. These modules can shed light on the mechanism of the disease, suggesting areas for further study and possible means of intervention.

We also use networks to discover how information flows between individual nodes. For example, by applying the principles of current flow within an electric circuit, we have been able to identify the causal (altered) disease genes and the pathways they dysregulate, providing another way to discover groups of genes involved in a disease.

Unfortunately, most currently available interaction networks are static depictions of a dynamically changing system. They typically do not account for tissue types, developmental stages, disease status, and other factors. As a result, these networks cannot tell us the full story.

To consider these and other factors, we need a context-specific network. But to build one, we must use context-specific data. How can we do that, given the myriad conditions we must consider? Our new method, NetREX, moves us in that direction.

Network biology has facilitated progress in many areas of biomedical science. This simple, yet powerful, concept allows us to abstract the essence of relations between genes and proteins, predict interactions between drugs, study disease comorbidity, and discover important associations. Of course, discovering an association is just the first step in uncovering a mechanism, but it is often a crucial step.

headshot of Dr. Teresa Przytycka

Teresa M. Przytycka, PhD, leads the Algorithmic Methods in Computational and Systems Biology section at the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Dr. Przytycka is particularly interested in the dynamical properties of biological systems, including spatial, temporal and contextual variations, and exploring how such variations impact gene expression, the functioning of biological pathways, and the phenotype of the organism.

The More Things Change . . .

Back in January, I shared our plans for aligning the National Library of Medicine’s (NLM’s) organizational structure with the goals and vision in the 2017-2027 Strategic Plan. Now, in the heat of summer, it’s time to tell you about our progress.

We’ve come a long way, while remaining true to our mission and commitment to be a source of trusted health information.

First things first.

We’re guided by a strategic plan that affirms our pledge to support data-driven science, engage with stakeholders, and build a workforce for the future while preserving our essential role as a National Library that collects, organizes, and disseminates biomedical and life sciences information to the public through offerings such as PubMed, the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), and MedlinePlus.

We examined all aspects of our organization, which encompasses 1,700 people, five key divisions, operational processes and practices related to our technical and physical infrastructure elements, and myriad offerings. Our efforts revealed—and reinforced—the immense talent that exists across NLM. They also identified opportunities for improving efficiency and effectiveness.

Perhaps the biggest transition in 20 years has been the sunset of the Specialized Information Services (SIS) division, with staff and programs being integrated across the Library. We will continue to work out logistics associated with this transition and will provide notice of changes on the SIS home page. In the meantime, I’d like to acknowledge the recently retired SIS leaders, Florence Chang, Acting Associate Director, and Janice Kelly, Acting Deputy Associate Director, for guiding an outstanding, dedicated team through a complex transition. I hope you will join me in thanking them for their service to NLM and wishing them well as they embark on new journeys.

We consolidated our outreach, training, and engagement activities and created an Office of Engagement and Training (OET) within the Division of Library Operations. Headed by Amanda J. Wilson, this office brings together many of the outreach and training staff and services from across the library, along with the National Network of Libraries of Medicine. We’ll be better able to coordinate outreach activities when and where they are needed most, launch national efforts, and institute modern planning and evaluation processes to ensure that our efforts are effective.

We evaluated the quality and sustainability of many NLM public offerings. Some key resources, such as TOXNET and ClinicalTrials.gov, moved to more modern, robust technical platforms to ensure security and sustainability. Some offerings were sunsetted, with the information integrated into more sustainable resources. As we continue to examine NLM’s offerings, we’ll post updates in the NLM Technical Bulletin.

We worked with workforce development experts to better understand the talents and goals of the more than 50 staff members who joined new teams or have new jobs. The creative design staff from our Audiovisual Program Development Branch (APDB) merged with the Office of Communications and Public Liaison, establishing a more powerful team that will use a wider array of video, images, and technology to tell the NLM story. The technical staff from APDB joined the Office of Computer and Communications Systems, affording greater coordination of our information technology, computer, and audiovisual production activities.

Some NLM staff have taken on new roles. For instance, in Library Operations, Stacey Arnesen, who led the Disaster Information Management Research Center, is now Deputy Director for the Public Services Division and Jeanne Goshorn, who led the Biomedical Information Services Branch, is now Deputy Director for the Bibliographic Services Division. Victor Cid joined the Lister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications’ Cognitive Science Branch and Dan Gerendasy, Chief of International Programs, kept his same role and joined OET.

To prepare staff for a future of data science, we developed the Data Science @NLM Training Program. As part of this program, each staff member completed a self-assessment and received an individual development plan that included activities such as self-study or participation in an in-depth training course.

Everyone’s present or future work will be touched by data science—from our indexers who need to interpret literature using new analytics, to our investigators who employ machine learning to power up natural language processing, to our purchasing clerks who invoice for cloud services. We’ve developed new work groups, sometimes by adding one or two new people to a branch or merging two smaller groups into one.

For better collaboration, some staff teams have moved from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) main campus to larger facilities off campus, allowing work groups that should work together to be together. And some of our meeting rooms have been equipped with better technology to enhance telework and promote staff productivity.

We’re preparing to hire new investigators for our intramural program and ensuring our research labs are equipped for data science. We’ve already renovated part of the Lister Hill Center to bring the ClinicalTrials.gov team together in one place and will be strengthening our physical infrastructure and our technological platforms. We’re planning a four-year renovation of the main Library building. The renovation will create more flexible work spaces for more than 150 people on the first floor and mezzanine, a new integrated reading room for our patrons, and a state-of-the-art training facility, as well as contribute to our ongoing efforts to increase our collection space.

How did all of this happen so quickly?

The outstanding staff at NLM is full of people willing to make plans and try new things despite some uncertainties. I’m grateful to Library staff and NIH leadership for their support as we journey into the future together.

As always, I’ll continue to keep you posted about key developments and milestones that take place along the way!