1 / 10

ICOLC 11th Meeting

ICOLC 11th Meeting. French medical libraries, e-resources and patrons’ access to information major problems ; any solution ? Paris, Oct. 28, 2009 G. Cobolet. One user : 3 traditional settings. 1. University : Professors, researchers and students (internship…)

danae
Télécharger la présentation

ICOLC 11th Meeting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ICOLC 11th Meeting French medical libraries, e-resources and patrons’ access to information major problems ; anysolution ? Paris, Oct. 28, 2009 G. Cobolet

  2. One user : 3 traditional settings 1. University : Professors, researchers and students (internship…) Authority: ministry of higher education 2. Hospital : the same academic population + health professionals (non academic) : physicians, surgeons, midwives… Authority : ministry of health 3. City : Practitioners :physicians, nurses, paramedics et al. (daily practice, continuing education) No authority BIUM :20% of the library users

  3. Patrons’ features * very mobile :they move from one place to another one (university, hospital, private office) during the work day, and they have to cope with changes, according to the setting : # status, # authority, and consequently # information access. * sharing the same needs : Journals : printed (until 1999) : nowadays electronic format (large collections or a few titles) ; databases ; ILL and document delivery (a substitute) : photocopies and fax : now files are requested.

  4. So, probably the major issue we’re facing : how to set up an understandable and transparent offer, whatever the place, the user’s affiliation and status ? Our proteiform patrons want to get the information they need and/or to read. They don’t mind about the institutions, the licenses’ constraints , etc.

  5. 1. Academic community No problem : * Local in-house access to e-resources * Remote access via the university's LDAP directory (authentified and controlled access) So they get what the university pays for and offers (via Couperin consortium) : in the university premises and outside (from home, abroad, everywhere)

  6. 2. Public hospitals 2 types : 2.1. Academic hospitals : CHU : 32 in the country Close links with medical schools (med students’ training ; professors as departments’ directors) * Academic patrons : no difficulty to access the e-collections from the hospital premises * But non academic population : ????? * agreement between the university and the hospital * the hospital signs up a contract with publishers : a very few do it (Paris) * no resource : some cases

  7. Public hospitals 2.2.Non academic hospitals :the majority : # sizes * The students (internship : they move every 6 months) have remote access to their university resources * The other health professionals : - the hospital signs up a contract with some publishers : a very very few do it (via Uni.H.A. consortium), title per title - no resource : the vast majority

  8. Practitioners in the city * They have to move to the university. No distant access outside of the university (since they don’t belong to the institution). * Some subscribe to one e-title. * Most of them : nothing, except printed journals (when they subscribe to). * An experiment : BIUM + Elsevier (Freedom collection ; controlled personal access) : 3 months=85€ ; 6 months=115€ ; 12 months= 225€. Everybody is not willing to afford such an expense, relatively costly (30 clients/year).

  9. To summarize * Hospitals (whatever their status and size are), universities and small care units share the same public. * This public, according its status, the place, the job or the period, has the same needs, but not the same rights nor the same access to e-literature. * Borders and jungle : - strong institutional barriers : 2 ministries - varying funding sources and levels of funding : in most hospitals, scientific information is not the major concern of managers - several negotiating « networks » coexist : Couperin, Uni.H.A., AP-HP, Inserm

  10. While expecting the development of open access journals and institutional repositories that we highly recommand and promote on our websites, 1. to develop cooperative efforts between the networks and the institutions. Why not to join forces, competencies and portfolios to build up a mutual offer, clear and understandable by every user ? 2. to negotiate national licenses that would benefit most people and avoid overlapping, gaps and interest conflicts 3. to set up an electronic document delivery service that might satisfy many requests (fees )

More Related