The quick & the dirty: The good, the bad & the ugly of database overlap at the journal title level
45
The Good, t he Bad & the Ugly of Database Overlap at the Journal Title Level By Karen R. Harker & Priya K., University of North Texas Libraries
-
Upload
university-of-north-texas -
Category
Data & Analytics
-
view
60 -
download
0
description
Given the decreasing budgets for collections at many libraries, librarians are looking at abstracting and indexing (A&I) resources and full-text databases with a more skeptic eye. In addition to traditional evaluation measures, such as costs, usage and faculty input, we looked at the overlap of indexing and/or full-text coverage. Those who have conducted such overlap studies have approached it at either the journal or article level. Article-level overlap studies demonstrate coverage of selected articles in the databases under study. Conversely, journal-level studies examine the extent of indexing of journals among the selected databases. Both methods are very time-consuming and require extensive resources. A simplification of the journal-level method is to compare lists of journals indexed. Two tools, Cufts and JISC's Academic Database Assessment Tool (ADAT) are very useful for this purpose, but do not include all databases. Many databases need to be manually collected. This presentation will describe the background to such a project, the specific tools and procedures used, how the results were used to address budget reductions, and the limitations of the results. Members of the audience will be able to consider using this method for evaluating their own abstract and index databases for budgetary purposes.
Transcript of The quick & the dirty: The good, the bad & the ugly of database overlap at the journal title level
The Good, the Bad & the Ugly of Database
Overlap at the Journal Title Level
By
Karen R. Harker
& Priya K.,
University of North Texas Libraries
EngineeringDB
Physics DB
Science DB
Overlap in Coverage is Natural
Web-scale discovery systems are changing the information ecosystem
Duplication of content is no longer a necessaryevil
Materials budgets being squeezed
Key Question:
What could we drop, if we had to?
What we wanted to know
Done the hard way
Limited to Abstract & IndexesOnly
First Attempt, 2012
• Download Lists
• Import into Database
Coverage
• Paired Comparisons
• On ISSN
Match• Overlap Rate
• Unique Titles
Report
Outcome of First Attempt
The Good
Confirm suspicions Some databases cut
Updated information
Some additional info coverage years
scope of coverage
Provided foundation database
The Bad & the Ugly
Took a lot of time
Some lists not easily transportable
Some lists without ISSNs
Limited to one-on-one comparisons
Another round of budget cuts
Looking at full-text aggregator databases
Gathering more data about resources
Less time to devote
Graduate Student Assistant help
Second Attempt, 2014
JISC Academic Database Assessment Tool (ADAT)
CUFTS
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
Reinventing the Wheel?
Academic Database Assessment Tool (ADAT)
Originally from JISC (UK)
Now administered by Center for Research Libraries (CRL)
Lost some functionality
Selected resources
Paired comparisons only
No differentiation between indexing or full-text
JISC ADAT
What ADAT used to provide
Jacso, P. (2010). The JISC academic database assessment tool -- virtues and vices. Online Information Review, 34(5), 806-814.
What you get from ADAT now
Open Source Serials Management
Simon Fraser University, BC, Canada
Public tools: Resource Comparison
Broad selection of resources
Differentiates between indexing and full-text
CUFTS
Like CUFTS
Specific to UNT Libraries’ holdings
Compare one to any number of resources
Full-text only – no information on indexing alone
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
Trying other sources
CUFTS
JISC ADAT
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
Compare results with manual version
Good enough?
Priya Kizhakkethil
Graduate Library Assistant
CUFTS Maintenance Tool – Resource Comparison
Serial Solutions – Overlap Analysis
Center for Academic Resources, JISC Collection – Academic Database Assessment Tool
Tools Used
CUFTS
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
JISC ADAT
Number of…
Unique Titles
Titles Overlapped in Target Database
Unique Full-Text Titles
Full-Text Titles Overlapped in Target Database
Kind of data collected
Data derived
Indexed
Total number of titles indexed
% of Unique titles
% of titles Overlapped
Full-Text
Total number of full-text titles
% of Unique full text titles
% of full-text titles Overlapped
Using CUFTS
Results from CUFTS
# Duplicates from CUFTS
Unique Titles via CUFTS
# Unique from CUFTS
Recording Results
CUFTS for Full-Text
Recording Results
Results from JISC ADAT
Recording Results from JISC ADAT
Conclusions on Data Gathering
Quick
Easy to run
Recently updated
JISC summary table
Serials Solutions summary
Dirty
Data didn’t match
Data changed over time
CUFTS Sloooow
Summary difficult to find
Data requires tweaking
Reinventing the Wheel?
Is this better than doing it manually?
The Good, the Bad & the Ugly
JISC ADAT
The Good: Simple table
The Bad: Limited number of databases
15 Bibliographic
9 Full-Text
Only paired-comparison
No pretty pictures
The Ugly: Unable to download or export results
CUFTS
The Good: Extensive list of databases and
versions. Can download results. Can compare indexing & full-
text separately Can compare up to 4 databases
at once
The Bad: Some resources not available
The Ugly: Had not been updated at time of first attempt.
The Good, the Bad & the Ugly
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
The Good: Easy to run
Nice summaries
Can download results
Compare any number of resources
Serials Solutions Overlap Analysis
The Bad: Limited to full-text coverage only
The Pretty: Is BEST!
Comparison of Sources
The Good
Mostly consistent Within 10%
Most databases & aggregators covered About 15% not available
Some coverage details Year
Scope
The Bad
Duplication of titles
Missing ISSNs
Lack of coverage details Year
Scope
Most Data Fairly Consistent
Coyote Ugly
Wildly different denominators!
Different kinds of content.
The Good: Much faster
The Bad: Not all databases available
The Ugly: Some data unreliable or inconsistent.
Outcomes
Need All Four Wheels
ADAT CUFTS
SerSol Manual
Hart, Alfred. Improvement in Wagon-Brakes., Patent, December 4, 1877; digital images, (http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth166725/ : accessed April 24, 2014), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, http://texashistory.unt.edu ; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department, Denton, Texas.
