Poster Board Number: 83
Title: Online Journal Backfiles: An Analysis of Actual and Projected Use
Objective: Journal publishers are digitizing their backfiles and offering one-time purchases to libraries. Research shows low usage of articles older than ten to fifteen years in the health sciences. The results of this research will show the actual usage of print and online journal backfiles and serve as a baseline for the consideration of the purchase of online backfiles for the health sciences library.
Methods: In this research, 2010 usage data were extracted from the library’s online and print journal backfile collections and separated into clinical and research title groups. First, usage data were obtained from the publishers and compared for select library-owned backfiles and the corresponding current subscribed runs. Second, one publisher’s usage data for library-subscribed titles with available but not licensed or purchased backfiles was obtained and compared to the publisher provided “access denied” report for the corresponding backfiles. Circulation, interlibrary loan, and document delivery data for these titles were also extracted. In-house use data were not used due to data integrity issues. The percentage of backfile and current run use for all titles was calculated and compared, as well as analysis of clinical and research backfile journal usage.
Results: For titles in which backfile ownership and current access exist, the aggregate of backfile usage fell between 3% and 7% of total use. Of note, 1 title’s backfile received 13% of its total use, while another showed declining usage of backfiles with volume age. For subscribed titles with no backfile ownership or access, the aggregated backfile turnaways and print usage for an 8-month period was 7%, though 10 titles’ backfile usage ranged from 10%-26% of total use. The clinical versus research title backfile usage did not reveal any discernable differences. Although low usage of backfiles was typical, notable spikes in use of individual titles should be considered when evaluating backfile packages. Furthermore, the research process revealed several lessons learned, including the inadequacy of the current standard reporting system for online journal turnaways and an inconsistency of publisher provision of more telling turnaway reporting.
Authors: Heather L. Brown, Student, Certificate of Advanced Study in Health Sciences Librarianship, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, and Head, Access Services; Ann Kaste, Digital Resources Librarian, McGoogan Library of Medicine; University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE
