engaging users in a journals review project anne murphy ba dlis msc head librarian tallaght hospital...
TRANSCRIPT
Engaging users in a journals
review projectAnne Murphy BA DLIS MSc
Head Librarian Tallaght Hospital
eLibrary Management Workshop, HSLG, 10th March 2012
Tallaght Hospital, Dublin
Provide tertiary service to 400,000 people in 3 counties
National referral centre for some clinical specialities
Tallaght Hospital Library
Library website:Evidence & reference databases 300 journals in 200912,000 books
Baseline of 300 journals in 2009
14
73
31
182
Retained
Cancelled in 2010
Cancelled in 2011
Cancelled in 2012
Total of 118 cancelled titles in 3 years
Baseline of 300 Journals in 2009
14
73
31
8399
Retained
Cancelled in 2010
Cancelled in 2011
15% cut in 2012
31% cut in 2012
Total of 201 cancelled titles in 3 years
Literature Search• Budget reductions are a primary driver for
libraries in undertaking a journals review. • Cancellations can damage the relationship
between users and their library if communication is poorly or incompletely executed.
• Libraries are keen to include users in the reviews to safeguard good working relationships with users and ensure the relevance of collections
The Journal Review Project
Meet the budget target Protect good relationship with staff Retain the most relevant, valued and used
journals
Communication Strategy
• Open a dialogue with our users• Use the Project to market the Library• Target group: doctors, senior clinical staff
and managers, and the Management Team
• Key message: You have a great Library• Channels: Paper, email, website, face to
face
Identify the journals
Core1%
Package8%
Secure funding9%
For review82%
286 journals in total
236 for review
Conduct the user evaluations
Rating scale:1. Essential2. Cancel only if necessary3. May be cancelled4. Cancel
• Identify the survey group• Survey method: paper or online• Decide what titles asking to evaluate
User evaluation survey form
Columns:Journal titleRating scaleDepartmentFormat of journalSubscription status
Respondents in 2011
36% response rate
Medical47%
Nursing17%
Allied Health29%
Other professionals2%
Management5%
Response rates:100% Rheumatology12% Surgery
User evaluations 2012
Leaner and cleaner
Increased the number surveyed to 550 and decreased the number of customised forms to 31
Respondents in 2012
Medical41%
Nursing19%
Allied Health29%
Management7%
Other Professionals4%
34% response rate
Compile the user evaluations
Columns:JournalDecisionDepartment4 sets of columns, 1 per rating: number & percentageCheck columnTotal population of respondents
Decision-making criteria
• Principles– departments would have equitable coverage– The most used and most valued would be
retained• 2011 - 1 title per dept to cut• 2012
– 15%: 2 journals per department to keep– 31%: 4 core titles and aimed to retain 1 journal
per department
Round 2: two thresholds
44 journals tagged for probable cancellation
9 journals identified for purchase
Cost > €2,000
OR
< 1O uses
Post-operative Review 2011
• The decision-making process proved successful
• Successfully managed staff expectations• Librarians’ knowledge is crucial
nmnmmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnmnnmnmnmnm
Consider all these titles as core reading
Two specialist journals is a minimumTwo [...] journals for a teaching hospital is a
disgrace
Midpoint of 2012 Project
Report back to hospital staff in June 2012
Meet with stakeholders Leverage staff advocacy for
their information needs to be met
Survey staff about their use of the published literature, discovery methods and their experience of the research publishing process
Stakeholder meetings
• May– Pharmacy, – Health & Social Care Professions– Laboratory
• June– Clinical Specialities– Nursing– Other
Why do they need the library?
• Clinical practice• For the care of a specific patient to answer a
clinical query about their treatment• Guiding practice and keeping up to date• Provide teaching and internship to MSc &
PhD students/trainees• CPD points for maintaining registration
Communication: staying out front
• Be available, start discussions, support your decisions with evidence, and listen and record what your users are telling you, and reflect it back to them
• Raised the Library’s profile and credibility with clinicians: they value research and find prestige in being published, and presenting at conference
• No drama, just calm building of evidence and persistence in making the case
Our users are talking with us because we
actively engaged with them and continue to
do so, and we are visible and accessible.
The alternative is closure.
Further readingCarey R, Elfstrand S, Hijleh R, An evidence-based approach for gaining faculty acceptance in a serials
cancellation project, Collection Management, 2006, 30(2), 59-72.Gallagher J, Bauer K, Dollar D M, Evidence-based librarianship: utilizing data from all available sources
to make judicious print cancellation decisions, Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services, 2005; 29, 169-179.
Sinha R, Tucker C, Scherlen A, Finding the delicate balance: serials assessment at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Serials Review, 2005, 31(2),120-124
Haley P, Analysis of print and electronic serials’ use statistics facilitates print cancellation decisions, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 2006, 1, 57-59.
Day A, A look at librarianship through the lens of an academic library serials review, In the library with the lead pipe [serial on the internet]. 2009, p.3 (accessed 18 October 2010). (http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2009/a-look-at-librarianship-through-the-lens-of-an-academic-library-serials-review/ )
Ward R K, Christensen J O, Spackman E, A systematic approach for evaluating and upgrading academic science journal collections, Serials Review, 2005, 32(1), 4-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Murphy, A, An evidence-based approach to engaging healthcare users in a journal review project,
Insights,2012, 25(1), 44–50, doi: 10.1629/2048-7754.25.1.44Murphy, A, An evidence-based approach to engaging healthcare users in a journal review project.
Presentation at 35th UKSG Conference, Glasgow, 26th-28th March2012. http://river-valley.tv/an-evidence-based-approach-to-engaging-healthcare-users-in-a-journals-review-project/