• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Evidence Based Library and Information Practice >Analysis of Print and Electronic Serials’ Use Statistics Facilitates Print Cancellation Decisions
【24h】

Analysis of Print and Electronic Serials’ Use Statistics Facilitates Print Cancellation Decisions

机译：分析印刷品和电子连续出版物的使用统计信息有助于做出印刷取消决定

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A review of: Gallagher, John, Kathleen Bauer, Daniel M. Dollar. “Evidence-Based Librarianship: Utilizing Data From All Available Sources to Make Judicious Print Cancellation Decisions.” Library Collections, Acquisitions & Technical Services 29.2 (2005): 169-79. Objective – To apply the principles of evidence-based librarianship to the decision-making process regarding the cancellation of print serials. Design – Quantitative analysis of local and national data from various sources. Subjects – Data sources included 1249 current unbound print journals, 3465 Medline-indexed electronic journals, statistics from the Association of Research Libraries and American Association of Health Sciences Libraries, as well as traditional library statistics. Setting – The study was conducted in the Yale University’s Cushing/Whitney Medical Library located in New Haven, Connecticut U.S.A. Methods – Several sources were targeted for data. A three-month periodical usage study of the current issues of the library’s 1249 actively received print titles was undertaken. Excel-generated alphabetical listings of titles were used by shelvers to indicate, with a check mark, which issues were shelved during a specified week. The workflow was adjusted to ensure only items under study were counted. Signs asking patrons not to re-shelve journal issues were posted. Usage data were collected weekly and entered into an Excel spreadsheet where the total use of the journals was tracked. In-house circulation, photocopy, and gate count statistics were also used. In addition to the survey, SFX statistics for the library’s electronic journals indexed in MEDLINE (3465) were gathered during the same 3 month period covered by the print usage survey. MEDLINE was chosen as the delineating factor to ensure consistent subject coverage with the print journal collection. For perspective and trends, statistics from the Association of Research Libraries and the American Association of Health Sciences Libraries were considered. Main Results – Based on the study’s findings, 53% of the print collection (657 titles) received no use during the study period; 7.1 % (89 titles) were used more than once per month; and 1.28% were used one or more times per week. Further, only 10% (125 titles) of the collection represented 60.7% of the total print collection use. There was also a direct correlation between the drop in patrons coming to the library and the decrease in print periodical use. SFX statistics revealed that of the 3465 MEDLINE indexed titles 14.8% (513 titles) were not accessed at all and 10% of the journals represented 56.8% of all SFX usage. These results were consistent with statistics from the Association of Research Libraries and the American Association of Health Sciences Libraries. Conclusion – Titles that were used the most in print were also used the most electronically. Further, the study revealed that print journals are used only a fraction as often as their electronic counterparts. Indeed, in both the case of print and electronic journals the largest use came from a small number of subscribed titles. Print collection maintenance is more labour intensive and costly than electronic. Consequently, resources spent supporting 53% of the print collection that is not used seriously impacts efficiency. With constraints on acquisitions budgets, funding unused collections does not make sense. Examination of the print serial collection is only part of ensuring effective collections. As this study has indicated, unused electronic titles are also a drain on resources and further analysis of electronic packages is warranted.
机译：评论：加拉格尔，约翰，凯瑟琳·鲍尔，丹尼尔·多尔。 “基于证据的图书馆管理：利用所有可用来源的数据做出明智的打印取消决定。”图书馆馆藏，获取和技术服务29.2（2005）：169-79。目标–将基于证据的图书馆管理原则应用于有关取消印刷系列的决策过程。设计–对来自各种来源的本地和国家数据进行定量分析。主题–数据源包括1249种当前未绑定的印刷期刊，3465种Medline索引的电子期刊，研究图书馆协会和美国卫生科学图书馆协会的统计数据以及传统的图书馆统计数据。设置-研究是在耶鲁大学位于美国康涅狄格州纽黑文市的库欣/惠特尼医学图书馆中进行的。进行了为期三个月的定期使用研究，以期对图书馆1249份积极收到的印刷出版物的当前使用情况进行研究。书架使用Excel生成的标题的字母顺序列表，并带有复选标记，以指示在指定的一周内搁置了哪些问题。调整了工作流程，以确保仅对正在研究的项目进行计数。张贴告示，要求顾客不要重新刊登期刊的标志。每周收集使用情况数据，并将其输入到Excel电子表格中，在其中跟踪期刊的总使用量。还使用了内部流通，复印和门数统计。除调查外，在印刷使用情况调查的同一三个月内，还收集了以MEDLINE（3465）编制索引的图书馆电子期刊的SFX统计数据。选择MEDLINE作为描述因素，以确保与印刷期刊集一致的主题覆盖范围。对于观点和趋势，考虑了研究图书馆协会和美国卫生科学图书馆协会的统计数据。主要结果–根据研究结果，研究期间53％的印刷品（657种）没有使用;每月使用超过一次，占7.1％（89个标题）;和1.28％每周使用一次或多次。此外，馆藏中只有10％（125个标题）代表了全部印刷馆藏使用的60.7％。来图书馆的顾客减少与印刷期刊使用的减少之间也有直接相关性。 SFX统计数据显示，在3465份MEDLINE索引标题中，完全没有访问14.8％（513个标题），而10％的期刊占所有SFX使用的56.8％。这些结果与研究图书馆协会和美国卫生科学图书馆协会的统计数据一致。结论–印刷中使用最多的标题使用的电子也最多。此外，研究表明，印刷期刊的使用频率仅为电子期刊的一小部分。的确，无论是印刷期刊还是电子期刊，最大的用途都来自少量的订阅出版物。印刷品收集维护比电子设备维护更耗费人力和成本。因此，用于支持未使用的打印集的53％的资源会严重影响效率。由于采购预算有限，为未使用的馆藏提供资金是没有意义的。检查印刷系列收藏只是确保有效收藏的一部分。正如这项研究表明的那样，未使用的电子标题也会浪费资源，因此有必要对电子包装进行进一步分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号