Un enfoque curricular por proyectos:

The toxicology subject area has seen a variety of subject guides and resource listings, exemplifying many of the points m ode above. These will be discussed in the context of qualitative evaluation of resources in chap ter five, and only a few salient examples will be given here.

The printed book listing is exemplified by Wexler's m onograph, a new edition of which was published in 2000. As noted above, this provides a selective listing, with

indications of particularly significant items, based on personal experience. It is

structured primarily by format: following an initial chap ter on the history of toxicology, chapters 2-21 describe US-based resources, according to publication medium. Chapters are further sub-divided in a variety of ways, including subject and origin. Chapters 22-24 consider international toxicology resources, whilst ch a p te r 25 covers resources from different countries. There is a mixture of ann ota te d entries and directory style un-annotated listings. The book was first published in 1983, and a second edition app e a re d in 1988. It is still regarded as the single best resource listing for the subject.

The m onograph ch a p te r is exemplified by Deschamps and Morgan's (1993) article in a two-volume m onograph on general and applied toxicology. Structured into three main sections by type of resource - printed, computerised, and

individual resources, with additional directory listings. The intention of the authors is given as showing the range of possible sources with limited numbers of specific examples. A section in a m onograph, in this case on m edical information resources, is exem plified by Morton and G odbolt (1992), who provide a n n o ta te d descriptions of a small num ber of sources. Monographs of this sort are typically u p d a te d every few years, Morton and G odbolt being in its 4*^ edition.

The journal article form at has several exemplifications, of which only two are

m entioned here. The article by Liverman et al. (1997) gives a discursive description of a num ber of online databases, for which brief details are then displayed in a tabular form at; there is no other structuring. Holton (1986) gives an n o ta te d descriptions of databases within a structure dividing by database category - dictionary,

bibliographic and information - giving examples of databases within e ach category. Like most journal articles, these have not been updated.

An exam ple of a report form at is Hargreaves' (1980) British Library report on toxicology information sources; this gave an extensively annotated description of a set of

resources aiming a t comprehensiveness, and structured by form: bibliographic databases, factual databanks, printed/card/m icroform products, institutions and research centres, and national / international toxicology information programmes. Another exam ple is the guide to sources in chem ical toxicology, jointly produ ced by the Association of Information Officers in the Pharmaceutical Industry (AlOPI) and the UK Online User Group, AlOPI (1980). This is categorised by type of resource, with u nannotated listings of printed textbooks and handbooks (sub-divided by specific subject), and of printed abstracting and indexing services, and a n n ota te d listings of com puterised sources. Like most reports, these were a single publication (though the AlOPI report describes itself as a firsf edition), and have not been upd ate d.

C onference proceedings are exemplified by Robinson (1989), w ho gives a selective a nd a n n ota te d list of computerised information resources, categorised by format: online bibliographic databases, online factual databanks, and CD-ROM sources.

Of several Internet sites offering lists of toxicology resources, a typical exam ple is the toxicology section of MedPhorm, offered by the Italian Universita’ degli Studi di Torino (http://w w w .m edfarm .unito.it/toxicol/toxicol 1 .htm ll. This offers an unannotated list of exclusively world w ide w e b resources, categorised by subject speciality: general toxicology, poisons, clinical toxicology, drug and alcohol abuse, and toxicology education. OMNI, the UK based, biom edical subject gatew ay, offers a highly

selective list of w e b resources without categorisation other than subject access by NLM classification and MeSH thesaurus terms. The sites are selected acco rd in g to strict quality criteria, fully annotated, and checked for correctness and possible ch a n g e on a monthly basis.

It is clear from these examples that the toxicology discipline already offers an array of diverse resource listings. Whilst none of these, even Wexler's most recent, and

arguably, definitive, resource guide, claims to be comprehensive, it is not the

intention of this chap ter to produce a com plete, contem porary listing. Indeed, this is rather an impossible task, as even were it feasible to identify every single resource relevant to toxicology, the rote a t which new resources can be produ ced anywhere in the world far exceeds any current ability to track them.

The purpose of the listing is to provide a contextual framework for toxicology information, which co n serve os a tool for understanding of the range and relative significance of information resources. The list specifically includes newer, network based resources, and can be com pared with similar listings from the past, in order to assess the im pact of new ICTs.