Alignment of library services with the research lifecycle
Journal of the Medical Library Association, ISSN: 1558-9439, Vol: 107, Issue: 3, Page: 384-393
2019
- 13Citations
- 84Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef3
- Captures84
- Readers84
- 84
- Mentions1
- References1
- Wikipedia1
Article Description
Objectives: This study sought to understand the needs of biomedical researchers related to the research lifecycle and the present state of library support for biomedical research. Methods: Qualitative interview data were collected from biomedical researchers who were asked to describe their research activities from identifying a problem to measuring the impact of their findings. Health sciences library leaders were surveyed about the services that they currently provide or plan to provide in supporting biomedical research. Results: Library services were strongest at the beginning and end of the research lifecycle but were weaker in the conducting phase of research. Co-occurrence of codes from the qualitative data suggests that library services are on the fringe of rather than integrated into the research lifecycle. Discussion: Findings from this study suggest that tradition-based service models of health sciences libraries are insufficient to meet the needs of biomedical researchers. Investments by libraries in services that integrate with the conducting phase of research are needed for libraries to remain relevant in their support of the research lifecycle.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85068990701&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.595; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31258444; http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/595; https://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.595; https://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/595
University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know