View PDF |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Searching Databases
Findings revealed most graduate students use PubMed as a primary search tool, and faculty use MEDLINE, but a clear influence between these two groups was not found. The preference for one (but not both) of these two abstract search tools may indicate the persistence of the approach used when first adopting online search services. Faculty began using MEDLINE well before PubMed was launched, and subsequent training and use constitute a significant personal investment in skill development. PubMed emerged as a leading life sciences service more recently, capturing graduate student users.
Most faculty and senior researchers preferred the Ovid MEDLINE search interface, with its range of options and sophisticated ability to combine MeSH terms, for searching abstracts and locating articles. Graduate students, however, preferred PubMed for primary literature searching. Despite receiving training or exposure to MEDLINE in graduate school, many of these students discontinued its use in favor of the simpler, Web-like PubMed.
The library has been delivering access to MEDLINE through Ovid since 1992 (when it was CD-Plus). Over the years the mode of delivery has changed, but the commitment to Ovid MEDLINE has continued — until recently. The field study has confirmed our perception of the shift by end users to PubMed, and the library is now reconsidering the approach it uses to deliver MEDLINE.
The study also showed that Web of Science was used to check known authors, citations to one’s own research, and journal impact factors, but rarely for general research or searching. ERIC was noted by some as a full-text search alternative, but was considered difficult to use.
Intermittent use of chemistry databases was cited, with SciFinder, ChemFinder and Beilstein noted, but none of the participants cited use of these services in their diaries. Awareness and use of specialized databases was also found, especially for clinical research (Cochrane, Micromedex) and population statistics (Statistics Canada).
The field study has confirmed our perception of frustrations our users encounter in accessing a variety of information resources — each with its own interface. As part of the Scholars Portal initiative, the library is implementing a local mirror of CSA’s Illumina system. This will provide access to the e-journals on ScienceServer, MEDLINE and the Web of Science databases through a single Google-like interface.
At the time of the study, Scopus was in early development and did not enter into discussions with faculty and researchers. Subsequently, some of the same faculty participated in Scopus functional demonstrations and focus groups. We have been providing access to Scopus since it was made available to Development Partners in April 2004. Based on user reactions and our belief that it will overcome some of the information use and delivery problems found in the study, the University of Toronto Library has now licensed Scopus.
Reading articles: print vs. electronic
Faculty and researchers clearly enjoy the convenience of access to electronic journals. Yet, most indicated a preference not to read research materials online, but to print and read at a later, convenient time and location. PDF is greatly preferred to HMTL for its resemblance to the printed article, which remains the standard format of interest and exchange. HTML is rarely printed due to formatting or availability problems with figures and tables. Some participants use HTML articles online to navigate to references for key articles, but this was found to be an advanced, limited behavior.
The final printed article was also preferred for reasons of readability, portability and its affordance as a living document, allowing markups and note taking. Investigators observed stacks of articles being read for critical information. These articles showed highlights, notes and even drawings throughout to assist the reader in noting important points and to capture related ideas.
Current awareness and alerting services
This practice was not widely evidenced among pharmacology researchers. While some noted a preference for scanning journals and other resources online as needed, they are not reading print journal copies to any significant extent, prefering to browse even Science and Nature via website editions. Interviews and diaries, especially of clinical researchers, showed numerous examples of searching for and browsing specific disciplinary websites. Some researchers showed a stronger preference for targeted searching over reading through numerous article citations or abstracts unrelated to their research needs. Only one researcher had tableof- contents alerts established, and others reported they did not wish to receive extra emails from journal table-of-contents alerts.
Since 1989, the library has been offering a locally developed alerting service based on Current Contents data. The study confirmed our perceptions of the use of alerting services. Given recent developments in systems such as Scopus, Web of Knowledge and Illumina, and the relatively limited use made of alerting services, the library has discontinued its alerting service and is guiding users to other services. 
