K.T.L. Vaughan

Factors influencing publication choice: why faculty choose open access

BackgroundIn an attempt to identify motivating factors involved in decisions to publish in open access and open archives (OA) journals, individual interviews with biomedical faculty members at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-Chapel Hill) and Duke University, two major research universities, were conducted. The interviews focused on faculty identified as early adopters of OA/free full-text publishing.MethodsSearches conducted in PubMed and PubMed Central identified faculty from the two institutions who have published works in OA/free full-text journals. The searches targeted authors with multiple OA citations during a specified 18 month period. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the most prolific OA authors at each university. Individual interviews attempted to determine whether the authors were aware they published in OA journals, why they chose to publish in OA journals, what factors influenced their publishing decisions, and their general attitude towards OA publishing models.Results & DiscussionFourteen interviews were granted and completed. Respondents included a fairly even mix of Assistant, Associate and Full professors. Results indicate that when targeting biomedical faculty at UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke, speed of publication and copyright retention are unlikely motivating factors or incentives for the promotion of OA publishing. In addition, author fees required by some open access journals are unlikely barriers or disincentives.ConclusionIt appears that publication quality is of utmost importance when choosing publication venues in general, while free access and visibility are specifically noted incentives for selection of OA journals. Therefore, free public availability and increased exposure may not be strong enough incentives for authors to choose open access over more traditional and respected subscription based publications, unless the quality issue is also addressed.

Changing use patterns of print journals in the digital age: impacts of electronic equivalents on print chemistry journal use

Little data are available that can help librarians solve issues surrounding print versus online journals management, including ascertaining when print journals are no longer needed. This study examines the short-term effects of online availability on the use of print chemistry journals. The Duke University Chemistry Library gained access to Elsevier titles via ScienceDirect in February 2000. By comparing reshelving data for the print journals from 1999, 2000, and 2001, this study identifies the short-term changes in journals use that can be attributed to the introduction of ScienceDirect. In the first two years after ScienceDirect was introduced, use of print journals nearly halved. The diminished use of the print collection has important implications for collection management in sci-tech libraries.

Development of the research lifecycle model for library services

QUESTION Can the niche services of individual librarians across multiple libraries be developed into a suite of standard services available to all scientists that support the entire research lifecycle? SETTING Services at a large, research-intensive state university campus are described. METHOD Initial data were collected via concept mapping by librarians. Additional data were collected at conferences and meetings through interactive poster presentations. MAIN RESULTS Services of interest to scientists for each of the stages in the research lifecycle were developed by the team to reflect the wide range of strengths of team members in aggregate. CONCLUSION Input from researchers was the most effective tool for developing the model. A flexible research lifecycle model can be developed to match the needs of different service groups and the skills of different librarians.

An evaluation of pharmacogenomic information provided by five common drug information resources.

INTRODUCTION This study evaluated whether pharmacogenomic information contained in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved package inserts of sixty-five drugs was present in five drug information resources. METHODS The study searched for biomarkers from the FDA package inserts in 5 drug information sources: American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information (AHFS), Facts & Comparisons 4.0 (Facts), ePocrates Online Free (ePocrates Free), Lexicomp Online (Lexicomp), and Micromedex 2.0. Each resource had the opportunity to present biomarker information for 65 drugs, a total of 325 opportunities. A binary system was used to indicate presence or absence of the biomarker information. A sub-analysis was performed on the 13 most frequently prescribed drugs in the United States. RESULTS Package insert biomarker information was available, on average, for 81.5% of the 65 FDA-listed drugs in 2011. Percent availability for the individual resources was: Lexicomp, 95.3%; Micromedex 2.0, 92.3%; Facts, 76.9%; AHFS, 75.3%; and ePocrates Free, 67.7%. The sub-analysis of the 13 top drugs showed Lexicomp and Micromedex 2.0 had the most mentions, 92.3%; ePocrates Free had the least, 53.8%. CONCLUSION The strongest resource for pharmacogenomic information was Lexicomp. The gap between Lexicomp and ePocrates Free is concerning. Clinicians would miss pharmacogenomic information 6.6 times more often in ePocrates Free than in Lexicomp. IMPLICATIONS Health sciences librarians should be aware of the variation in biomarker availability when recommending drug resources for licensing and use. Librarians can also use this study to encourage publishers to include pharmacogenomics information from the package insert as a minimum standard.

Hidden Treasures: Librarian Office Hours for Three Health Sciences Schools

The changing needs of students and faculty have prompted UNC Chapel Hills Health Sciences Library to reconsider the delivery of library services. Several years of outreach and office hours have yielded an array of “hidden treasures,” or secondary outcomes, of both online and in-person office hours. The online office hours are tailored for the Schools of Medicine, Pharmacy, and Public Health. This article examines the benefits that go beyond simple consultation statistics and encompass more qualitative aspects of success resulting from increased outreach, goodwill, and stronger library-departmental partnerships.

Development of Targeted Online Modules for Recurring Reference Questions

When students are given assignments with specific information needs, they may turn to the library for help. The UNC Health Sciences Library developed three short online modules to teach first-year pharmacy students how to find early/animal studies, mechanism of action information, and specific study types in an effort to lessen demand on the reference desk. The modules filled two goals: to free up time that had been spent on three common low-level questions and to provide a pedagogically sound online tool to teach students how to find answers to these three questions. The modules were created using Adobe Captivate. Developing and promoting the modules took three hours of the pharmacy librarians time compared with nearly 23 hours spent answering individual questions via e-mail, in consultations, and at the reference desk before the modules were introduced. After introducing the modules, only one student asked for help from the library compared to more than 60 who viewed the online modules at least once.

The Role of the Academic Librarian

Introduction Time management Organizing Communication Meetings Collection development in an electronic world Public service in the electronic world Networking Moving up Leadership.

Developing an interdisciplinary collaboration center in an academic Health Sciences Library.

Abstract This article describes the evolution of the Health Sciences Librarys plans for an interdisciplinary, technology-enhanced collaboration center, from a technology-driven space to one with a vision of support for peer-to-peer learning and research. The center offers an exciting opportunity to be an essential partner in collaborative and interdisciplinary programs such as the new Carolina Center for Exploratory Genetic Analysis. The Library is a centrally located and neutral place, which helps minimize geographical and territorial obstacles to effective collaboration. The collaboration center raises the Librarys visibility and allows staff to demonstrate the value of knowledge resources, services, technology expertise, infrastructure, and facilities for group study and collaboration.

A Preliminary Analysis of Library Holdings as Compared to the Basic Resources for Pharmacy Education List

The catalogs of 11 university libraries were analyzed against the Basic Resources for Pharmaceutical Education (BRPE) to measure the percent coverage of the core total list as well as the core sublist. There is no clear trend in this data to link school age, size, or rank with percentage of coverage of the total list or the “First Purchase” core list when treated as independent variables. Approximately half of the schools have significantly higher percentages of core titles than statistically expected. Based on this data, it is difficult to predict what percentage of titles on the BRPE a library will contain.

Connecting the Libraries and Athletics through Instruction and Outreach

ABSTRACT This column describes the approaches taken by librarians and staff at James Madison University (JMU) Libraries & Educational Technologies (LET) to extend library support to university athletics. The model resembles that used for outreach to academic programs and was first adapted to the semi-clinical, nonacademic Strength & Conditioning Department, then to JMU Athletics as a whole. Librarians offered targeted instructional sessions, orientations, and asynchronous learning modules embedded in the learning management system. This new relationship has provided an opportunity for broader collaboration, increasing LET’s presence across campus.