Number 51 May 7, 1996

Edited by David Morse (University of Southern California) dmorse@hsc.usc.edu

Editorial Board members:

Email address for all correspondence and subscriptions: dmorse@hsc.usc.edu

WEB Edition Published at Duke University:
HTML coding by Eric Albright, maldacht@duke.edu
Masthead design by Dan Barkey, d-barkey@nwu.edu

About BLAB

CONTENTS

51.1 Follow-up: Managing Electronic Journals

51.2 Follow-up: Faculty Input in Collection Development

51.3 Answers to Queries: Charging Users for Lost Books

51.4 Answers to Queries: Assessing the Quality of Collections

51.5 Review: All-American Medical Hall of Fame

51.6 Announcement: NASIG Meeting

51.7 Announcement: Update on MLA Annual Meeting Program

51.8 Announcement: Electronic Book

51.9 Announcement: Online JBC Subscription Charges

51.10 New Queries: CD-ROM Monographs

51.11 New Queries: Current Opinion Journals Online

51.12 New Queries: Dropping Print Subscriptions to Online Indexes

51.1 FOLLOW-UP: MANAGING ELECTRONIC JOURNALS

From: Danny Jones, Univ. Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio <jones@blis.uthscsa.edu>

One issue which I forgot to mention about electronic journals is the need for libraries to have some type of transaction reporting for their electronic subscriptions. If paid e-journal subscriptions are accessed over the internet, then publishers need to be able to provide the library subscriber with a data showing that they are used. The publishers may not understand this yet, but in the case of the two OCLC-based paid e-journal subscriptions we get, we have renewed them basically on faith and to demonstrate that we can provide this type of material in the library. We do not get any reports from OCLC which indicate that they are being used at all. We suspect that the "Online journal of knowledge synthesis for nursing" only began getting used when a nursing faculty member required all her students to look at an article there. The only other use we are aware of is the number of ILL's we supply from the journal for libraries that cannot or will not subscribe to it. While the price of these titles is not expensive, we can no longer afford to subscribe to journals that are not used, and the availability of transaction data on the journal use will become a criterion for selection of them in the future.

Re: the use of vendors to facilitate web/online subscriptions...this very issue was raised at a recent EBSCO Executive Seminar I attended at EBSCO International HQ in Birmingham, AL in early March. Several participants voiced support for this notion. The idea of going through a front-end/gateway (provided by one's vendor) that approves access via domain name of accessing machine sure makes sense, though it doesn't help customers who should have access but are trying to get in remote from campus. Anyway, I thought I'd mention that this issue came up in a context where a vendor was listening.

From: Theresa Baker, Univ. Kansas Medical Center <Tbaker@kumc.wpo.ukans.edu>

At the University of Kansas Medical Center, we subscribe to several Web journals including Immunology Today, Online Journal of Knowledge Synthesis for Nursing, and Nucleic Acids Research Online. We provide access to the journals through the Library's home page (http://www.kumc.edu/service/dykes/dykeslib.html). Access restrictions are handled by limiting the pages with the login and password to people coming in from KUMC IP addresses. We chose not to include this information in our online catalog because anyone can telnet into it. This protects both the publisher and the library...we do not want outsiders tying up any of our simultaneous uses!

This system is not perfect (we occasionally receive phone calls from students who are trying to connect from an AOL account, and cannot access the login/password page). However, in this transitional phase of electronic journals, we feel that we are doing what we can to work with the current license agreements.

51.2 FOLLOW-UP: FACULTY INPUT IN COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

From: Jerry Perry, Rush University <jperry@lib.rpslmc.edu>

Re: faculty input...at the Library of Rush University, I have tried to use formally established faculty liaisons but I must say the results have been spotty. Honestly, because I never seem to have the time, I have not been as assertive in following up with faculty as I'd like.

As regards books, a very few are quite vocal and always let me know which new titles they'd like me to add. A perennial goal is to generate more faculty contacts. The lesson I've learned is that you really need to frequently tend and nurture your faculty like roses if you wanna get sweet smelling results!

Faculty involvement in journal review/cancellations has been far more successful at Rush, perhaps because I give it a lot of time and attention, or maybe because it strikes a sensitive nerve. We have had five years of journal cancellations, and have been very successful in pruning dead wood. Last year was the first where customers grew alarmed that we were cutting too deep, and I was able to mobilize a few of the more vocal sorts to write letters in support of the collection. We received a benefaction from our Medical Center's Management team, and while I'm not sure the letters were a cause, I like to think they had an effect!

51.3 ANSWERS TO QUERIES: CHARGING USERS FOR LOST BOOKS

From: Judy Rieke, Univ. North Dakota <rieke@plains.nodak.edu>

1. When charging users for missing or lost books, how do people determine the amount? We used to charge the original price of the book, plus a processing fee. However, when one tries to replace a book it usually costs more than the original. Plus, we found it quite time consuming to come up with prices on older items, especially if we no longer had the acquisitions records readily available.

So, we are planning to use an "average" cost figure and revise it each year to keep it current. My problem is deciding what to use for my "average" cost...Brandon-Hill list, actual average of our last year's acquisitions (very low and getting lower every day), Bowker annual...

I'd like to find out how others handle this problem.

From: Connie Poole, Southern Illinois Univ. <poole@lincoln.siumed.edu>

In response to Judith Rieke's question on lost book charges, at Southern Illinois University School of Medicine Library, we charge the actual cost of the book if it can still be purchased (listed in BIP, in publisher's current catalog, or such), plus a processing fee. We also give the patron the option of purchasing and bringing us a replacement copy of the book. For this we waive the processing fee. For items that are out-of-print, we charge the average cost of a medical book as listed in the latest Bowker Annual. We use this with discretion. If the book is extraordinary in some way, we reserve the right to determine a custom replacement fee. We have not had as much success determining a standard replacement fee for videos, slides, etc. These are less numerous and we usually try to determine a fair price based on age of the item and what we can buy that is newer on the same topic.

From: Karen Albert, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia <ALBERT@SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG>

We just charge the replacement cost plus $10. For older books, we look for a title that would replace it, and use that for the charge. This can be time-consuming.

From: Pamela M. Rose, Univ. Buffalo <pmrose@acsu.Buffalo.EDU>

We locate the current price of the book if still available and add a processing fee. If not, we use the original price + the fee. If no price is available, I make a best guestimate (based on number of pages, publisher, illustrations, and experience) + the fee. Patrons understand that we charge the price it costs us now to replace the item.

We found using an average price seemed unfair to both us and the patron. Cases where the title is either very expensive or just a few dollars were too numerous to be balanced out by an average price, particularly for medical books. We do charge a minimum $10.00 + fee for gratis titles to cover the extra phone or mail charges.

From: Marian Dorner, Cleveland Clinic Foundation <DORNERM@cesmtp.ccf.org>

We charge the cost of the book + $15 processing fee. We take the cost of the book from the acquisition field in our OPAC. (Our OPAC has only been up for 2 years). For books that we don't have prices for, we look them up in Books in Print. If that fails, we take the price of a similar title. Since we do not replace all the books we charge users for, I figure that any price discrepancies between original cost & replacement cost are balanced. Generally, the titles that aren't replaced are out-of-print.

From: Naomi Fackler, Texas A&M <Nfackler@medlib.tamu.edu>

When a book is lost or missing we charge the client the actual cost of the book if the title is recent enough for us be able to obtain that figure. We add a $15 processing fee. (This has remained the same for at least 10 years). If we cannot obtain an actual cost we charge $70 plus the processing fee. This was the average estimated cost of a book for us for several years.

We calculate this average cost directly from the number of books ordered and the estimated cost at point of order. If we do not have a price at point of order we assign a price of $75. We record this monthly in a database and run a cumulative annual total. We do this mainly to help us remain within budget, since there is such a time gap between encumbering and expending funds.

After writing this down I am struck again by the inadequacy of our methods. In the past we did have a home-grown acquisitions database that we gave up when we went to our current integrated system. Unfortunately, we cannot seem to get accurate reports from it.

Sorry, I wandered a bit from the subject at hand. My point is that I think the "average" cost figure should come from the average cost of books purchased for your library if that figure is available. That figure will best reflect the uniqueness of your collection.

We have also noted a reduction in the average cost of the books we add to the collection. It is now about $65. Has anyone else experienced this? Is the cost really going down? or have we become more wary of purchasing certain very expensive titles?

From: Linda Hulbert, St. Louis Univ. <hulbertla@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU>

I have not liked using the original price of the book because to replace the book would certainly cost more than its original cost. I assume we are talking about out of print items. Items in print are charged what it would cost to replace them (even if I don't). But for out of print I use an average cost which comes from our book vendor of the books WE buy by call number range. I do it by call number range rather than just an average cost for a medical book because I think a nurse (or historian) could justifiably complain. We can justify using the average cost of a nursing book because, while we may not be able to find just the book they lost or mutilated, we can honestly say we will have to replace "in kind." I keep this list up to date and would happily share it - it may not reflect your purchasing, but it could be useful.

51.4 ANSWERS TO QUERIES: ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF COLLECTIONS

From: The Editor

Do any of you have any novel ways of assessing the quality of your collection? Other than citing numbers of volumes added or amounts of money spent, how do you satisfy yourself and others that the collection is strong and is meeting the needs of your users? (Some of you may recognize this as the topic of the Workshop I will be leading at the Collection Development Symposium in Kansas City!)

From: Linda Hulbert, St. Louis Univ. <hulbertla@sluvca.slu.edu>

One way, and I did this a long time ago and it was really labor intensive, was to compare ILL, circulation and acquisitions by call number. Nowadays it would probably be somewhat easier if you have an on-line system. I had to do it by hand and would still have to do that for ill book requests. My hope was that our circulation would match our ILL and our acquisitions. Any subject area which had high circulation and high ILL and low acquisitions told me we should buy more in that area (for us it was hematology as the worst out of kilter); areas thathad high acquisitions and low circulation and low ill, told me we could cut back. There were several ways to cut the data. One thing I did not worry about was high ill. I considered that it could look like I wasn't doing a good job, because the user had to go get a lot of stuff, but then I decided (ever confident in my competence) that the University of Illinois (one of the largest academic libraries in America) was a net borrower. So having stuff breeds borrowing more stuff.

From: Lynn Fortney, EBSCO <lynnf@ebsco.com>

The [EBSCO Index Medicus] price study evolved from working with libraries doing RLG Conspectus work to evaluate collection strength. EBSCO produces reports that measure a biomedical library's current subscriptions against Index Medicus, divided by 110 subjects based on those used in LJI. So if a library subscribes to 50 of the 73 IM titles we have classed as PEDIATRICS, the report shows all 73 titles in the subject category, puts an * by the 50 titles the library gets, counts 'em up, and calculates collection strength - which in this illustration would be 68% collection strength "as measured against a standard resource" (which is what conspectus requires).

There are eight reports in the Index Medicus Report Series, including one intended to be distributed to faculty/research staff as a survey of the relative importance of the current titles in the collection. Not a USE study, to be sure, but a faculty evaluation study.

These reports were so popular, that we now apply the "measurement-against-index" idea to about 150 different indexes, including CINAHL, Hospital & Health Admin Index, IDL, INI, ISI indexes, etc.

I don't think one can say that the library takes 2100 titles (the AAHSLD mean), and so has a decent collection strength. Biomed librarians are better than most at paying close attention to the needs of their local institutions (such as what health professions schools do you serve?) and less concerned with measuring up to a core collection - Brandon-Hill lists not withstanding! But, again, because med libraries don't class journals by subject, when the peds department or the surgery dept wants an analysis, it's tough to do.

Just before I left Lister Hill Library at UAB, we were able to get some grant money to improve collection strength in subjects areas that were "underrepresented" in the State. I had to prove that LHL had an existing collection strength of C% and I wanted to bring it up to A% and that the average price of a title in that subject was $Z, and we needed to add X number of titles to get from C% to A%, so we needed $$$ to do so. EBSCO didn't do these reports back then, and it took me a tremendous amount of time and effort to come up with the required figures. In the end it was worthwhile - LHL got several grants, I learned a lot about our collection, and then I was able to apply what I'd learned when I came to work at EBSCO by creating reports that would make those kinds of projects easier for biomedical librarians.

As far as books go - well, we bought so few of those, we didn't do a lot of detailed analysis. I did some citation analysis when a new and VERY IMPORTANT faculty member appeared on the scene so that when I met with them for the first time I could say that the library had looked at the kinds of things they cited and bought so-and-so. That never failed to impress them.

[The latest IM Price Survey can be obtained by emailing a request to Lynn.]

51.5 REVIEW: ALL-AMERICAN MEDICAL HALL OF FAME

From: Linda Hulbert, St. Louis Univ. <hulbertla@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU>

Many of you may have received by now an small advertisement for An All-American Medical Hall of Fame written by Hollister Smith.

Usually I throw these things away, but this time I didn't because the author is a St. Louisan who came to visit me and get some advice on selling it. He showed me the gallies.

In some ways it is a bit amateurish, but it was accepted for publication by Mosby. They wanted to give him only $1,000 and give it away as a promotion. He has spent 17 years collecting this information; getting photos; getting permission to print the photos (etc etc) and the offer was too low, so he is publishing it himself. We pondered hard copy or soft. I suggested he stay cheap because he was paying for the publishing and printing so it is soft covered - despite its archival nature, I thought those who bought it could pay a little for binding and the cost ($25) wouldn't prevent purchase. Hard bound would have cost him considerably more. Publishing on that level of speculation with your own Social Security check seemed additionally risky to me.

Anyway, I think you'll like the book. The photos were clear, the text interesting and informative. The people covered were recommended by each state medical society and major societies.

51.6 ANNOUNCEMENTS: NASIG MEETING

From: Anne McKee, Blackwell's Periodicals <mckee@BNAMF.BLACKWELL.COM>

The NASIG Conference Planning and Program Planning Committees are pleased to announce that as of 4/1/96, registration for the 11th Annual Conference is now open to all non-members.

The conference entitled: "Pioneering New Serials Frontiers: From Petroglyphs to Cyberserials" will be held at the Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque from 6/20-6/23, 1996. The full conference pkg including registration, housing for 3 nights (6/20-6/22) and meals only is $300 for a single room and $275 per person for a double. REGISTRATIONS AFTER MAY 20TH, 1996 ARE SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY AND A $25 LATE FEE.

2 Preconferences will be held on 6/20 ("EDI & Related Standards" and "Risk Taking for Library Pioneers") are an additional $40 each.

An exciting program has been planned and several fun social events such as a reception at Anderson Valley Vineyards and dinner at the Rio Grande Zoological Park. For the first time, NASIG is offering a package of copies of all work- shop handouts for $20.

Brochures and registration forms can be requested to Ruth Haest at: 505-277-7218, fax: 505-277-4446, email: NASIG@unm.edu or via the homepage: http://www.unm.edu/~nasig.

PLEASE NOTE: As payment MUST accompany the registration, we cannot accept fax or email registrations.

51.7 ANNOUNCEMENT: UPDATE ON MLA ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM

From: Frances Chen, Univ. Arizona <francesc@ahsl.arizona.edu>

The Collection Development Section is co-sponsoring a program with the Publishing and Information Industry Relations Committee at the 1996 MLA Annual Meeting in Kansas City. The program, entitled "Electronic Information in the Networked Environment: Pricing, Licensing, and Negotiating," will take place on Monday, June 3, from 2:00 -3:00 pm.

The Speakers are: Helen Atkins, Manager, Product Development, ISI; Stephen Bosch, Information Access Librarian, University of Arizona; Mary Helms, Associate Director, McGoogan Library of Medicine, University of Nebraska; and Darrell Gunter, Vice President, Sales and Services Americas, Elsevier. Darrell Gunter will replace Karen Hunter who was originally scheduled to speak at this session.

The Section's Business Meeting will immediately follow the program session on Monday, June 3, from 3:30 - 4:30 pm.

51.8 ANNOUNCEMENTS: ELECTRONIC BOOK

From: Gail Sanders, Infomedix <infomedx@oneworld.owt.com>

[Editor's Note: Although I do not normally include publisher announcements in BLAB, I thought that the novelty of this item merited inclusion.]

My company, Infomedix, publishes the book "Prevention and Therapy of Cancer and Other Common Diseases: Alternative and Traditional Approaches" in a variety of electronic formats, including HTML. (Perhaps you have already received notice of this book; I have sent out brief announcements to several newsgroups which seemed appropriate. If so, I beg your pardon for any "overkill.") The book comes with over 20,000 references from peer-reviewed biomedical literature through 1995.

If you are interested, you can seen an online demo of the book at http://www.owt.com/infomedix. We have two complete chapters there, as well as over 1000 references.

51.9 ANNOUNCEMENT: ONLINE JBC SUBSCRIPTION CHARGES

From: Michael Newman, Stanford Univ, Falconer Biology Library <michael@krypton.stanford.edu>

I'm working with the HighWire press on developing the Journal of Biological Chemistry on the World Wide Web. We're planning to introduce access control and charging this spring and we're trying to alert as many interested librarians as possible before this happens. I thought the announcement below, which has already appeared on STS-L, might be appropriate for BLAB. Mary Buttner referred me to you.

Dear Librarian,

In late Spring 1996, The Council of the ASBMB, the non-profit publisher of the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) will charge institutions US$200 for a subscription to the JBC Online. For the remainder of 1996, this fee allows for unrestricted Internet access to: tables of contents, abstracts and full text searching, full text, PDFs, links to Medline and GenBank, future tables of contents. Institutions must have a subscription to the print JBC to be eligible for subscription to the JBC Online.

Guests (those without a subscription) will have access to: tables of contents, abstracts and full text searching.

Included with recent issues of the print JBC is a letter describing the process and costs of obtaining institutional subscriptions to the JBC Online. If you don't receive this letter, subscription information will be available soon on the JBC Online home page

http://www-jbc.stanford.edu/jbc/ .

Or, you can contact the:

American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 9650 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20814-3996
(301) 530-7145 Fax: (301) 571-1824
email: asbmb@asbmb.faseb.org

51.10 NEW QUERIES: CD-ROM MONOGRAPHS

From: Diana Zinnato, Thomas Jefferson Univ. <zinnato@jeflin.tju.edu>

I would like to know if anyone has purchased any full-text monographs on CD-ROM (ex. Harrison's) and how they are being offered to patrons and if they are heavily used. Also, is there a site on the Web that lists the medical titles available in this format or where else might I find out about them (had no luck with Acqweb)? BTW, I registered for the symposium but have not received any confirmation, should I expect to receive something?

51.11 NEW QUERIES: CURRENT OPINION JOURNALS ONLINE

From: Barbara Shipman, Univ. Michigan <bshipman@umich.edu>

We have subscribed to Current Opinions in Medicine and Current Opinions in Biology for almost a year now. These are the electronic versions of the Current Opinion titles. We've paid a great deal of money for these things, and are wondering if they are worth renewing. We'd be very interested in hearing from other libraries who have subscribed to them.

The main problem we've noticed is a lack of currency. Print issues often are published long before the same issue is available electronically. In addition, some of the searching syntaxes documented do not work as presented. We've also been unable to print on an HP LaserJet 4L, although we have had no trouble (other than the extreme slowness of the whole printing process) with the HP LaserJet 4M or 4si series. OCLC has attributed the 4L printing problem to a conflict between the video driver and the software.

If anyone else is wrestling with the issue of whether to renew the Current Opinions electronic titles, or has made a decision about renewal, we'd be interested in hearing from you.

51.12 NEW QUERIES: DROPPING PRINT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO ONLINE INDEXES

From: Kimberly J. Laird, East Tennessee State <LAIRDK@MEDSERV.EAST-TENN-ST.EDU>

1. Have you dropped paper indexes in the last five years, which ones?

2. What was the justification for dropping these?

3. If you haven't dropped Index Medicus, are you considering dropping it? If so, why? If not, why?

4. Have you had any complaints from users of the library about not having access to the paper version?

5. Have you had any complaints from LCME or any accreditation team over not having a paper edition of the indexes?

6. Has anyone considered subscribing only to the cumulative Index Medicus as a backup?

Thanks in advance.... I should explain that as a result of our journal survey this year, we've been asked to consider dropping Index Medicus, since we have network access to MEDLINE and Grateful Med access as well.

So, anything that reassures us that dropping Index Medicus would be okay or messages saying that dropping Index Medicus is not a good idea <and reasons why> would be VERY useful.