Search

Background: In response to several of Texas' largest medical libraries being forced to discard all serial print holdings, the Texas A&M University System and University of Texas System's Joint Library Facility (JLF) staff worked to help provide a solution to save and store these resources. This process fire-started a comprehensive effort by JLF staff to contact the National Library of Medicine (NLM) and devise a blueprint that would be used to help save and preserve all serial medical resources listed in NLM's medical retention program. Case Presentation: In an unprecedented approach, the Texas A&M JLF staff launched efforts to collect and preserve the complete holdings range of all NLM MedPrint periodical runs. This case report details the planning and steps JLF staff took to accomplish this feat; highlights important matters of consideration for the medical community which heavily relies upon continuous access to MedPrint materials; and provides insight on the apparent preservation vulnerabilities these materials increasingly face in an environment where digitization may create a false sense of security. Discussion: By May 2021, JLF had collected complete title runs up to year 2000 for 202 of the 254 MedPrint titles, which consists of more than twelve thousand volumes. These efforts proved particularly beneficial in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced NLM to halt ILL processing from their print collection. During this time, JLF was uniquely positioned to meet and respond to the historic high number of medical literature ILL requests it received during this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This quantitative longitudinal study cross-analyzes a shared print repository's periodical supplement records against physical copies to determine the accuracy of bibliographic representation for bound supplements. The authors relate the study's findings to collection managers and library administrators by highlighting prominent issues discovered, and by discussing the challenges this descriptive disconnect may present for shared repositories, as well as any library collection containing periodical supplements. By requesting that participating libraries provide catalog records for materials set to be submitted, the shared print repository central to this study was well positioned to access and analyze large samples of records and materials from an assortment of independent library collections. It was discovered that many periodical supplement records failed to fully represent actual supplement content held, particularly when involving supplements that were bound together with serial volumes. As a result, the authors pose that if relying only on standard supplement cataloging requirements to represent periodical supplement holdings, it may be particularly difficult for those overseeing collection management to know exactly what supplement content is held and bound within or apart from the affiliated parent resource materials. In turn, this issue may result in libraries inadvertently mislaying or discarding valuable supplement content, particularly when supplement information is not recorded and cataloged at the item level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This case study details the techniques, strategies, and workflow used by Sam Houston State University's (SHSU) Newton Gresham Library in preparing materials to submit and claim with the Texas A&M University System Joint Library Facility (JLF). The article provides an overview of JLF history and operations, and details the critical factors leading to SHSU removing large numbers of print materials from its collection. Additionally, the article discusses why SHSU elected to leverage the services offered by JLF, examines challenges encountered, and reviews techniques employed to enhance the pre-check processing required to participate in JLF's shared collection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

E-book platforms have multiplied among vendors and publishers, complicating not only acquisitions and collection development decisions, but also the user experience. Using a methodology of task-based user testing, the researchers sought to measure and compare user performance of eight common tasks on nine e-book platforms: EBSCO eBooks, ProQuest Ebook Central, Gale Virtual Reference Library (GVRL), Oxford Reference, Safari Books Online, IGI Global, CRCnetBASE, Springer Link, and JSTOR. Success and failure rates per task, average time spent per task, and user comments were evaluated to gauge the usability of each platform. Findings indicate that platforms vary widely in terms of users' ability and speed in completing known-item searches, navigation tasks, and identification of specialized tools, with implications for library acquisition and user instruction decisions. Results also suggest several key vendor design recommendations for an optimal user experience. The study did not aim to declare a "winning" platform, and all the platforms tested demonstrated both strengths and weaknesses in different aspects, but overall performance and user preference favored ProQuest's Ebook Central platform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]