Newsgroups: bit.listserv.medlib-l
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:22:39 EST
From:         HCLADM08@UCONNVM.BITNET
Subject:      OJCCT SURVERY SUMMARY

On December 1, 1992 I initiated an informal survey that focused on
the usage of the Online Journal of Clurrent Clinical Trials.  This
survey garneder eleven responses; therefore, with respect to the
number of medlib-l list subscribers, it is not valid, although I
believe the data is reliable. Responses came from north, south, east, and
west including one response from Canada.

Question 1: Are library patrons asking for any information from or about
the OJCCT?
Yes: 4   No:  7

Question 2:  How many documents has your library been asked to print or
download for patrons?
Responses:   4   0   2   0   0  1  0  0  0  0  1

Question 3:  Do you allow direct patron access to the library subscription
of the OJCCT?
Responses:  "patrons may use with assistance from reference staff (no one
has as yet)"
"Yes"
"No"
"No inquiries and made no efforts to advertise the journal"
"No. . .we will treat requests for access as we do requests for mediated
online searches."
"Yes"
"No, librarian would do the search."
"Yes"
"No"
"Not yet"
"No"

Question 4: If yes to #3, how do you access charges?  Please say "do not charge
" if that is your policy.
Responses:
No:  3   Yes:  1     Not applicable: 7
Examples of comments:  "We do not charg.  . . if demand increases we may
have to."
"Would not charge until it became a problem."
"We will only print, not download..."

Question 5:  What steps has your library taken to promote the availability
of the OJCCT?  Have these steps resulted in increased use or interest in the
OJCCT?
Responses:
No promotion: 5   Promoted in some manner:  6
Examples of comments:   "When faster access is available we plan to run an
article in our newsletter."
"Promotion included teaching a class, but this did not increase interest."
"We take no steps at all to promote this journal."
"Flyer to .... faculty; article in newsletter, demonstration to Library
Committee at a meeting."
"Absolutely none.  I did mention it to one of our heavy users one day
and even demonstrated it -- he wasn't interested."
"We don't promote other journals, why this?"

Question 6:  A Library subscription to the OJCCT includes an archival copy
of each year's articles on microfiche.  Will you make the fiche available
to patrons?  Will you make a paper copy of the fiche to shelve?
Responses:
Yes (to making fiche available): 6   No:  0  Undecided:  5
Yes (to making a paper copy): 1   No:  3    Undecided:  7

Question 7:OJCCT has been available for 4 months--what are your overall
impressions of the OJCCT?
"A disappointment really.  It is cumbersome to use and print from..."
"The whole program is painfully slow to access and use...Not much content
either."
"There are plenty of hard-copy journals to decide between, and I see no
reason why an electronic journal should be given any special consideration."
"...it was to heavily hyped before its appearance."
"Not being used...not worth the money."
"...maybe...we need more than four months to produce significant
contributions to the literature."
"Time factor is the greates problem, and I hope OCLC is working on that."
"...terrible journal and impossible to search.  There are very few
clinical trials articles published so far."
"Elegantly conceived...logistically difficult to implement in a library.
The concept is good but maybe the timing is wrong."

POSTSCRIPT:  As aforementioned, there were only eleven responses.
BUT I THANK THOSE ELEVEN RESPONDERS.  I BELIEVE YOU HAVE GIVEN SOME
INSIGHT INTO THE CURRENT PERSPECTIVE OF LIBRARIANS TO THE OJCCT.

Happy Holidays,
--
Nick Tomaiuolo, Information Services Librarian
hcladm08@uconnvm.uconn.edu
Univ. of Connecticut Health Center PO Box 4003
Farmington, CT 06034
Fax:   203 679 4046
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU