Access&ability Minisymposium "De digitale bibliotheek voor medici - toen, nu en straks" Bibliotheek MCH Medisch Centrum Haaglanden 26 september 2013 Jan W. Schoones Walaeus Library LUMC
Access&ability The three conduits of access Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH) Paper vs. online Literature searching
Access The three conduits of access Licensed access Open Access Intermediated Access plus: some SFX pitfalls
Licensed Access Licensed access licensing relevant (top)journals Library Committee decides
Licensed Access Library Committee - representatives of all four LUMC Divisions plus students Library committee focuses on Collection Development: selection of most appropriate material in an affordable way - what to buy and what not to buy (e.g. no clinical Nature Reviews in Leiden due to high price) 300.000 journals, 9.426 managed by Walaeus Library
Open Access Short history of article publishing 1605-1995: regular publishers > readers pay for access Shift since 1995: new > OA publishers > authors pay for publication 2005- : acceleration, plus: regular publishers offer OA option in regular journals
Financing models in Open Access (OA) Main principle: The author pays for publication in an OA journal = Article processing charge / publication fee / handling fee Market: - Traditional publishers with OA branch - Commercial OA publishers
Purpose of the author: > Ample distribution, reaching the readers you want > Minimize the costs for OA publication Options for MCH staff: Grants (NWO) Free publishing in OA journal Institutional membership (expensive) Green road (cheap) and Golden road (not so cheap)
Golden road or Green road Golden Road: Paying for publishing in OA or hybrid OA journal Institutional membership/agreement with reduced / waived Article Processing Charges -> 1.500 per published article
Golden road or Green road Green Road: self-archiving for free Article, already published in a regular journal, is made available in an institutional repository (rules apply) This pre-print or post-print republication is allowed without extra charges For Leyden University / LUMC: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl MCH:? -> 0,00 per re-published article
Green road: Archiving policies Useful tool: Sherpa RoMEO list http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo list of > 1,000 publisher s copyright transfer agreements
Costs Theoretical costs for MCH if MCH goes all the way on the golden road Number of regular articles published per year:? Price per OA-article: 1,500? times 1.500 =? per year, excl. 21% VAT Average author s costs BMC & PLoS charge $ 1,350 2,900 per article Range as found in 2010: from $ 8 to $ 3,900 per article
Caution: predatory publishers http://scholarlyoa.com/?s=criteria Jeffrey Beall, Metadata Librarian, University of Colorado, Denver Walaeus Library Walaeus & Bibliotheek Library MCH
How to recognize a predatory OA journal? Jeffrey Beall, Metadata Librarian, University of Colorado, Denver Walaeus Library Walaeus & Bibliotheek Library MCH
How to recognize a predatory OA journal? Indicators like advertisements which are not subject-related (or are the editors presenting themselves?): http://archive.ispub.com/journal/the-internet-journal-of-genomics-and-proteomics/
OA Information on Walaeus website (in Dutch)
Open Access in practice "Open Access is not an end in and of itself it is only a means to an end" (20 Sept 2013 Martin Wolf, University of Liverpool)
Intermediate Access Library intermediation: articles not available in MCH/LUMC can be supplied via request (IBL) deliverable through interlibrary document supply (charge starts at 6,50 per article) emergency: pay-per-view (price range $5 - > $150)
A technical matter: Access&SFX SFX - checks if access is available: YES/NO SFX only knows what the Leiden database of journals knows the Leiden database doesn't know everything daily changes in access information
Access&SFX SFX - checks if access is available: YES/NO If SFX says NO - beware: items which are available (free or otherwise) might not be known in the Leiden database - so if SFX says NO, check actual availability at publishers site or at google for a YES (access) or a definite NO
Access&SFX SFX - checks if access is available: YES/NO If SFX says YES - be aware: correct linking might not happen sometimes, due to various technical matters:
Access&SFX SFX mistakes due to technical matters: "strange page numbers" supplement issues various sites for one journal (journal transfers) meeting abstract references journal title changes no pdf, only html article can be hidden in "big pdf"
Access&SFX So if SFX says YES but takes you to a NO check at publishers site or at google for what's really happening several publisher sites for one journal with different holdings journal transfers, e.g. Acta Radiologica, changed publishers 3 times since 2004
Access&ability The three conduits of access Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH Westeinde) Paper vs. online Literature searching
Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH) Costs: licensing online information by pricing tier the bigger the potential amount of information users, the higher the price two journal examples: JAMA & NEJM effect on pricing of ebooks
Tier-example - JAMA tier definitions Tier D3 University systems with three (3) to (5) medical schools or affiliated hospitals Research facilities with 1201-2000 research staff Tier D2 University systems with two (2) medical schools or affiliated hospitals Research facilities with 801-1200 research staff Tier D1 Universities with a single medical school Research laboratories with 301-800 research staff Tier C* Universities with doctoral programs (without medical school) Separate health professional schools (other than medical schools) Global and multinational health agencies (excludes hospitals and hospital systems) Masters colleges with health programs¹ Research laboratories with 101-300 research staff -continued-
JAMA Tier HE2 Hospital system with 8-11 Hospitals Tier HE1 Hospital systems with 4-7 hospitals Single hospital with 11-20 affiliated clinics Tier HD Hospital systems with 2 3 hospitals Single hospital with 501 or more staffed beds plus up to 10 affiliated clinics Tier HC Single hospitals with 501 or more staffed beds Teaching hospitals¹ with 501 or more staffed beds Single hospital with up to 500 staffed beds plus up to 10 affiliated clinics Tier HB Single hospitals with 251 500 staffed beds Teaching hospitals with 500 or fewer staffed beds Tier HA2 Single hospitals with 121-250 staffed beds Tier HA1 Single hospitals with 120 or fewer staffed beds Non-tiered Hospital systems with more than 12 hospitals (Please contact your site license sales representati for pricing)
JAMA Pricing Tier JAMA JAMA+3 JAMA+6 JAMA+9 Tier D3 $10,206 $16,154 $19,040 $20,410 Tier D2 $8,164 $12,907 $15,217 $16,328 Tier D1 $6,881 $10,876 $12,829 $13,762 Tier C $3,499 $5,540 $6,531 $6,998 Tier B $2,158 $3,412 $4,024 $4,315 Tier A2 $1,166 $1,837 $2,187 $2,333 Tier A1 $816 $1,283 $1,516 $1,633 -continued-
JAMA Pricing Tier JAMA JAMA+3 JAMA+6 JAMA+9 Tier HE2 $9,972 $15,774 $18,603 $19,944 Tier HE1 $6,648 $10,526 $12,392 $13,296 Tier HD $3,995 $6,327 $7,435 $7,990 Tier HC $2,799 $4,432 $5,219 $5,598 Tier HB $2,333 $3,703 $4,345 $4,665 Tier HA2 $1,516 $2,391 $2,829 $3,032 Tier HA1 $1,109 $1,749 $2,070 $2,216
NEJM 2014-pricing Single Hospital: 501 or more staffed beds: 3,000 251 500 staffed beds: 2,500 121 250 staffed beds 1,650 up to 120 staffed beds 1,175 Universities with a single medical school (with more than 250 medical students): 7,120
Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH) e-books Walaeus Library has a small uptake of ebooks there is more uptake of e-books in smaller hospitals pricing models are in favor of smaller organizations (a p-book has a fixed price, lower VAT: p=6% ;e=21%) a maximum transition from p-book to e-book for LUMC would lead to a ten to hundred fold price increase pricing models and access models will evolve big deals vs. title-by title
Access&ability The three conduits of access Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH Westeinde) Paper vs. online Literature searching
Paper vs. online Journal articles vs. student textbooks Journal articles: push & pull is high Student textbooks: publisher push is high, user pull (from our students) is low "Nice to have a textbook online, but as added option, not as replacement. Paper is still the best tool for studying textbooks" e-journals are essential, e-books are not (yet)
Paper vs. online Paper vs. online/digital book: attention in an online environment digital distractions (social media, fragmentary reading) accessibility in an online system easy personal purchase very difficult institutional licensing, if possible at all
Paper vs. online One reality of online life Living in an echo chamber, life in a filter bubble finding information online depends on personal search history one exception: bibliographic databases such as PubMed e.g. Google, but less so for Google Scholar "For quick clinical searches, Google Scholar returns twice as many relevant articles as PubMed and provides greater access to free full-text articles" (Shariff et al. Retrieving Clinical Evidence: A Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar for Quick Clinical Searches. J Med Internet Res. 2013 Aug 15;15(8):e164)
Paper vs. online paper HTML pdf beyond pdf
Paper vs. online paper no technical interface needed reading from paper using Google Glass will mean other people will know what you read
Paper vs. online HTML some journals offer only html-fulltext some journals offer free html-fulltext but paid-for-pdfaccess some journals offer only html-fulltext in some older volumes of their journals
Paper vs. online pdf ReadCube - "luxury" pdf at Nature and Wiley with advanced interactive options for searching, using, and managing articles
Paper vs. online Beyond pdf ereader format epub App Mobipocket many journals, PubMed/PMC, ScienceDirect,
Access&ability The three conduits of access Big (LUMC) vs. not-so-big (MCH Westeinde) Paper vs. online Literature searching
Literature searching 100% is an illusion ("alles bestaat niet") Many users ask for all references on a topic, we try to retrieve as many references as possible - 100% is impossible, 99% is our goal PubMed contains a lot (23 million references), Web of Science even more (49 million references) PubMed indexes: 75.000 articles per month 2.700 articles per day 111 articles every hour 1 article per 30 seconds
Literature searching Three pillars of literature searching: Identification of concepts (PICO/CAT) Boolean logic Semantics
Literature searching Semantic traps: synonyms: neoplasm, cancer, tumor, carcinoma, onco homonyms: depression "Economic Recession"[Mesh] OR "Depression"[Mesh] OR "Depressive Disorder"[Mesh] OR "Depression, Chemical"[mesh]? antonyms: fertility/infertility, safe/unsafe word variations: regional or temporal language differences (then: leukaemie - now: leukemie), noun, verb, singular/plural drug names
Literature searching Some PubMed traps - ATM Automatic Term Mapping child: includes 1.400 references by author called Child (of which 101 are pediatric articles) nursing translates as "nursing"[subheading] OR "nursing"[all Fields] OR "nursing"[mesh Terms] OR "nursing"[all Fields] OR "breast feeding"[mesh Terms] OR ("breast"[all Fields] AND "feeding"[all Fields]) OR "breast feeding"[all Fields] imaging (743.717 hits) translates as "Bildgebung"[Journal] OR "imaging"[all Fields] diagnostic imaging (1.700.397 hits) translates as "diagnostic imaging"[mesh Terms] OR ("diagnostic"[all Fields] AND "imaging"[all Fields]) OR "diagnostic imaging"[all Fields] -> check the Search details on the right hand side of the PubMed screen
Literature searching Some other PubMed Pitfalls The "Human" filter - if you use this, you exclude : the animal-only-studies but also 2.000.000 non-indexed references, incl. 500.000 very recent ones within these excluded references there is a major set of references on human studies. They just are not indexed (yet) with the Human-check tag ("Humans"[mesh]) (don't) Limit to free fulltext you miss licensed access and intermediated access
Literature searching PubMed weaknesses searching for author addresses (use Web of Science and Embase): as of 2014 addresses of all authors will be added meeting abstracts (use Embase and Web of Science) Web of Science/Embase weaknesses no or limited epubs (PubMed is more current) no MeSH
Literature searching Google vs. PubMed et al. 1. replication of a search is impossible (Filter Bubble) 2. analysis of a set of results (why is a specific reference included or not) is impossible or at least very hard 3. management of results is impossible or too time consuming Google Scholar vs. PubMed et al. 1. replication of a search is slightly possible (no Filter Bubble [?]) 2. analysis of a set of results (why is a specific reference included or not) is possible but burdensome 3. management of results is possible but with larger sets too time consuming
Literature searching Citation / H-index Big misconception: Impact Factors only refer to a journal title (don't put impact factors in your CV) Citations only refer to a journal article H-index: two main sources Web of Science: higher quality, lower numbers, easy to produce, only available by (LUMC-)subscription Google Scholar: lower quality, higher numbers, needs extra work by author herself, free to use
Literature searching Retractions Recently published Walaeus WegWijzer Retractions at http://www.lumc.nl/walaeus Find you way around retractions - retracted publications retraction notices errata corrected and republished articles duplicate publications
Questions? Walaeus Library, LUMC, building 1, C1-Q Tel. 071 526 3890 walaeus@lumc.nl www.lumc.nl/walaeus