SISTEMA NACIONAL DE ABASTECIMIENTO

There was a slight decrease in the importance of in-house current awareness services over the project period. Figure E13.1.6A shows that whereas 45.6% (31) of scientists rated it 4 and over on the five point scale in Phase 1, this had decreased to 44% (30) in Phase 3. This decrease in the importance of current awareness is most marked in the cancer research and university groups, as shown by Figure E13.1.6B. Reasons included some members of the cancer research group giving up contents pages, the university group had found the cost of networking Current Contents within the department too expensive; and one industrial group member had started to use Dialog interactively. However, comments supporting the importance of in-house current awareness services to individual scientists occurred throughout the project period, as illustrated below:

“Current awareness is more important because of the increase in the number of papers and the number of journals” (Phase 1 - industrial group member) “The abstracting service provided by Information Services is increasing in importance ... it helps us to manage the information explosion” (Phase 1 - industrial group member)

“BIDS is becoming less important because of access to Current Contents”

(Phase 1 - MRC group member)

“I rely more on the delivery of contents pages of journals” (Phase 2 - cancer research group member)

''Current Contents and database searching are becoming more important” (Phase 3 - MRC group member).

Figure E l 3.2.1 shows the perceived declining impact of in-house current awareness services as a factor in information gathering activities over the project period.

6.7.7 Commercial Current Awareness Services

A small number of scientists, 8.8% (6) in Phase 1 increasing to 11.8% (8) in Phase 3, relied on commercial (rather than in-house run) current awareness services.

which they rated 4 and over on the five point scale, over the project period. Sources included electronic services, such as Chemical Abstracts Bulletins,

Current Contents on Diskette and drug companies’ databases, on the one hand, to printed sources, such as newsletters from commercial suppliers and product companies, companies’ update leaflets on product methods and equipment, Leeds Oncology Bulletin, Notre Dame Lists, CABIOS (Computer Applications in the Biosciences), Free Radicals Research Communication, Aids Information and Sheffield SUBIS (Sheffield University Biomedical Information Service) lists (Phases 1 and 2 only), on the other.

6.7.8 Online Databases

Electronic Bulletin Boards

There was a substantial increase in the importance of accessing information from online databases and electronic bulletin boards over the project period. Figure E l 3.1.8A shows that whereas 22.1% (15) of scientists rated these facilities 4 and over on the five point scale in Phase 1, this had increased to 51.5% (35) in Phase 3. This growth in the importance of accessing online databases and electronic bulletin boards is especially marked in the cancer and M RC groups, as shown in Figure E13.1.8B.

The main online databases utilised throughout the project period were M EDLINE, BIDS GDB, OMIM and Chemical Abstracts for sub-structure searches, although UnCover and Dialog databases were mentioned as well. In the case of the cancer and university groups, a few scientists used the M EDLINE Database interactively each week as a current awareness service. Externally, the Bionet bulletin boards were most often rated highly whereas internally in the industrial group, SCRIP was cited as essential. As at ICRF, in general, the M EDLINE CD database tended to be a service to the desktop by Phase 3, an MRC group member commenting during Phase 3 that “online MEDLINE is more important than current awareness” .

During Phase 1 of the project (with the exclusion of the industrial group who had no access to BIDS), 24% (14 of 58) of scientists felt that the BIDS ISI service would be potentially useful (or was useful if utilising it) by rating it 4 and over on the five point scale and, in contrast to the ICRF sample, by Phase 3 its actual usefulness had increased slightly to 27.6% (16) of the sample population, as shown in Figure E15.5.1. This increase was confined to the cancer research group only (see Figure E15.5.2). During Phase 1, a few scientists commented that they had

“not heard of it [BIDS]”, and an M RC group member stated that “BIDS is becoming less important because of access to Current Contents''. During Phase 2, a number of scientists commented that BIDS was “more useful with abstracts” and, during Phase 3, an M RC group member stated that “I still find BIDS useful for citation searches” and a university group member claimed that “BIDS has become more important because it covers the plant biochemistry field, which M EDLINE doesn’t” . However, the consistent complaint against the BIDS service was that it was slow, cumbersome and user unfriendly (as evidenced below), a number of scientists stating that M EDLINE sufficed for their retrospective requirements

response time slow during the day and tedious to search back years” (Phase 2 - MRC group member)

speed is variable and it [BIDS] hangs regularly” (Phase 2 - cancer research group member)

BIDS will be replaced by networked M EDLINE” (Phase 3 - cancer research group member)

“... I used to use BIDS a lot before we had a more user-friendly MEDLINE. Now I tend to use MEDLINE more than BIDS” (Phase 3 - MRC group member)

6.7.9 Other Sources o f Information

A small number of scientists 4.4% (3) from Phases 1 to 3 relied on other sources of information, which they rated 4 and over on the five point scale, during the course of the project. The main sources were contact with commercial companies, manufacturers’ hterature, the International Times and newspapers generally, textbooks, and internal technical reports produced by collaborators.

6.8

Perceived Impact of Developments and Potential Increased

Usage of Facilities

In Phase 1 of the project, 77.9% (53) of scientists claimed that they were comfortable (rated 4 and over on the five point scale) accessing electronic information, although a number relied on colleagues for help with infrequently utilised programs and databases. By Phase 3, this figure had risen to 85.3% (58) (see Figure E16.1.1) and is evident in all sectors (see Figure E l 6.1.2), reflecting scientists increasing use of and confidence in utilising electronic information sources. Furthermore, in Phase 1, 54.4% (37) of scientists claimed that information technology developments, such as electronic current awareness, M EDLINE CD database, BIDS databases, use of reference handling packages for formatting of references for bibliographies of scientific papers, in-house databases (where

present), LIS’ database resources and the electronic requesting system for document supply (where extant), had already affected their information handling techniques positively (4 and over on the five point scale).

“CD has had major impact. I used to be quite religious about browsing Current Contents, In fact I found myself spending at least one evening a week, a very boring evening, but I felt I had to do this. One of the impacts of the electronic CD is that it’s done away with a lot of browsing and you’re much more focused in your reading - as long as you do it reasonably regularly” (Phase 1 - cancer research group member) “4/5 - SCRIP and CD M EDLINE have made quite a big impact. Previously I used to sit with Index Medicus - so simplified that process considerably. I had no way of gathering general information about the pharmaceutical industry” . (Phase 1 - industrial group member)

“CD and BIDS have had a dramatic impact actually. I guess it means I feel I ’m less behind than I otherwise was. It’s definitely more flexible. I can access a range of things in depth and I like to do it late at night - so I can work when I feel like it” (Phase 1 - university group member)

By Phase 3, this figure had risen to 66.2% (45 - see Figure E15.4.1) and included networked MEDLINE, the gopher and world-wide web developments, mentioned previously, with their accompanying access to a range of Internet resources.

“ ... it’s completely changed the way I gather information. Before coming here I was at university and I would go down to the Library and I would look through the journals and physically do it all manually by hand. I don't have the time to do that now. So from that point of view it’s invaluable to have that electronic service - but then it’s not essential for my job. My situation has changed so much - it’s not a decision I ’ve made to move over, it’s just that circumstances have changed” . (Phase 3 - industrial group member)

“When one browses electronically, you are less likely to see unrelated articles that may grab your attention but, on the other hand, you do see related articles that you wouldn’t otherwise see. I don't know whether or not it’s better or worse. - but it’s different” (Phase 3 - university group member)

“ ... yes, since departmental network has been installed” (Phase 3 - university group member).

“... e-mail communication and fax made life easier. Access to databases and databanks is vital”. (Phase 3 - university group member)

“They haven’t made a big impact. The biggest difference is having people to ask to do things for me but not impacted on me personally. I think the big difference would come with being able to read papers with easy accessibility electronically. Everything else helps but not big impact” . (Phase 3 - university group member)

“yes, the impact of facilities, such as current awareness. Knowledge Server and HGMP, is increasing all the time. - it’s quicker and it’s easier” (Phase 3 - M RC group member)

“ ... sources, such as current awareness, GDB and M EDLINE - it’s quicker now I’m familiar with them (Phase 3 - M RC group member)

“ ... current awareness via Current Contents, MEDLINE and Knowledge Server - I probably do more literature searches than I used to do (Phase 3 - M RC group member)

Knowledge Server and MEDLINE ... yes - before I used to print off loads of irrelevant things - whereas now with abstracts you can decide what you want - so it saves tim e” (Phase 3 - MRC group member)

“M EDLINE particularly has made things so much easier - to be able to access information straight. The web I don't think in its current form and what it holds has had any impact at all other than filling in blank moments whilst you’re waiting for something to cook as it were” (Phase 3 - MRC group member).

“ ... over the 3 years further definite im p a c t... made me much more efficient in keeping up with database searches” (Phase 3 - M RC group member)

“ ... cumulatively made impact on way I information gather - although my role has changed over the 3 years too (Phase 3 - industrial group member)

“ ... current awareness has cumulatively made an impact - but more than anything I ’ve realised how limited what we do at the moment really is. Having contacted colleagues in other companies I realise how connected they are e.g. the Internet, how they can get data e.g. student at Loughborough University has to put data on a disc to send it” (Phase 3 - industrial group member)

“I use the systems but mostly helping others. Biggest problem is not accessing the data - it’s getting the desktops configured to access the data - i.e. getting the tool to work” (Phase 3 - industrial group member)

“ ... made life a lot easier in general - haven’t had to traipse over to the Library so often. Current Contents delivered via e-mail is useful” (Phase 3 - industrial group member)

Among the factors mentioned for increasing their use of electronic information in Phase 1 were: increased user-friendliness of central computer systems; intuitive interfaces generally; increased speed of performance of BIDS software; more training and backup documentation for all software including search strategies; the facility to access M EDLINE online via local area networks; the addition of abstracts to BIDS and better interface; end- user access to other databases online such as Chemical Abstracts (cancer research group member and industrial group member) and DIALOG’S databases (industrial group member); access to Current Contents centrally within own institution at reasonable cost (university group member); electronic access to pre-1966 data; better indexing of databases; easier editing and downloading of references; the introduction of the same word processing package for electronic mail as for documents; network connections for those without access from their laboratories or offices; more computers in laboratories and on desks to enable more frequent access to systems; access to networked resources from home, need for high resolution monitors for display of graphics; availability of the full-text of journals online; and more information on what resources were available. By Phase 3 some requests on this wish list had been fulfilled, for example, M EDLINE networked to the desktop; graphical user interface for many resources via web software; the addition of abstracts to BIDS; access to Chemical Abstracts and DIALOG databases for some industrial group members; access to networked resources from home for M RC group;

increased networked connections locally; more computers in many laboratories and offices enabling more frequent access to resources; and the availability of some online journals. However, by Phase 3 there were still demands for: more computers in laboratories and offices (reported examples of two machines between ten people in one laboratory as well as frequent sharing of machines); more full-text journals; more information about what services are available; more training especially on the Internet resources and use of the world-wide web browsers; easier Internet access (members of the industrial group); network connections for those units still without them; high resolution monitors for display of graphics; ability to transfer structures electronically and communicate with other chemists both internally and externally (members of industrial group); the same word processing package for electronic mail as for documents; and remote login facihties from home (all except MRC group).