eResource Management: Challenges & Solutions

1. eResource Management:Challenges & Solutions Mark Schregardus Vice-President, International Sales Ovid Technologies

2. Agenda • eResource Management challenges • How did it all get so complicated so quickly? • A challenging position for: • IP’s • Librarians and Administrators • End-users • Tools to assist in eResource Management • Federated searching • OpenURL LinkResolvers • Ovid’s platform for eResource Management • Developed with consortia in mind! • Discussion

3. E-resources: current situation • Bibliographic databases: many, all with descriptive names (Inspec, Cinahl, etc) • Electronic journals: • Subscribed & current • Subscribed with embargoe • Free “Open Access” journals • Current or embargoed • Individual titles • Packages: some current, some embargoed, some archive • Electronic books

4. E-resources: current situation • Library Catalog (OPAC) • Dissertation & Theses databases • Image databases • Research portals • Web sites with relevant (quality?) information • Institutional Repositories • Digital Archives =>Many different platforms, interfaces, search engines

5. Your Challenges How do I maximize the value of my investment in content resources? • How do I make sure users select & search the appropriate resources, in the best possible way • How do I provide seamless links & interconnect all available resources…. • …and how do I manage/administrate all this in a cost-effective manner???

6. Journals@Ovid How did it all get so complicated? ? ?

7. Aggregator (Dark Ages): Select a database Perform a search Retrieve results Visit the library Find the journal, Make a copy Aggregator (Yesterday): Select multiple databases Perform a search across dbs Deduplicate results Link to full text; or Visit the library for print copy; or Link to ILL or Doc Ordering system In the beginning..…

8. Today’s Information Provider • One of many in the library • Must link bi-directionally – out to full text, in from other sources • Competes with free search engines, free full text, free web sites • Competes with publishers’ web sites and aggregated full text service providers • Co-exists with search engines like Google, Yahoo, MSN Search

9. Librarians’ Dilemma: Purchasing Librarians purchase resources based on: • Price • User Interface – one UI is always better than two • Price • Vendor reputation & Services • Price • Integration with other library resources • Price • Ease of use for patrons – trainability • And of course, PRICE!

10. Librarians’ Dilemma: Training Helping Users Find Relevant Information: • Getting users excited about structured searching • What’s the big deal about • Boolean logic • Controlled Vocabularies • Index Browsing • Fielded searching • How do you even get their attention when there’s an easier way (Google)

11. Googlemania • Who needs structured searching? • Abundant results, relevance ranked • It’s FREE!

12. Googlemania: On the Down Side • Relevance ranking is Google’s “secret” • Can you be sure you about comprehensiveness • They’re NOT citations • You can’t do much with results • Limit • Refine by subject • Combine results • Sort results • Too many results: “Engineers and scientists are loosing faith in the Open Web and increasing reliance on peer to peer information seeking” (Outsell STM Report, Sept. 2005)

13. Google’s Answer… Google Scholar! • It’s a beta, so they’re getting away with ambiguity • Controlled sources: only peer reviewed materials as submitted by primary publishers • Ranking is based on: availability of full text, publication and number of citations • It is not going away in the foreseeable future

14. Google Scholar: the downside • Poor searching of Author and Title • Data that requires normalization and post processing • No indexing and taxonomies – value add of A/I db’s • Very poor disclosure of what is included/excluded • Serious (and unknown) content gaps:smaller publishers, archives (finds only 12% of all Blackwell articles, 45% of HW journals, etc) • “Content is the most obscure part of Google Scholar. Apart from the generic statement on the About page (…) there is no specific information about the publisher archives or the (p)reprint servers covered, nor about the type of documents processed (…) or the time span covered. Just because a service is free doesn't mean that the producer is not expected to disclose substantial information about the content”. Peter Jasco, Review of GS Beta, November 2004 • Bottom line: GS is not seen as a viable replacement for structured searching in applications that offer rich syntax, search tools like limiting, filtering, sorting, deduplication, alerting, and subject searching, sponsored by structured human indexing

15. One massive database Ease of use and always results (many!) Ranking No unified indexing No coverage for small and local language publishers Patchy coverage of certain academic areas Poor searching for expert searchers Too much noise? Many bibliographic sources Authentication and Training Issues for Administrators Specialised indexing and advanced search options Less “end” user friendly Quality control of content, source disclosure Better searching results but more effort upfront So Far: A Choice Between

16. Ovid’s perspective eResource Management & the role of Federated Searching and Link Resolver products for academic institutions and Consortia

17. Federated Searching & Link Resolvers Not new, but have traditionally been: • Expensive • Difficult to implement • Inflexible • Only for selected few • Provided by ILS vendors • Not designed with consortia in mind • Pricing models • Lack of self-administration possibilities • Authentication support • Customization options

18. Ovid’s approach to Federated Searching: SearchSolver • Developed with leader in core federated search technology • Modern technology • Supports wide range of search protocols • No limits on simultaneously searching of targets • Local language searching • ASP model: Online hosting • no technology hassles • Benefit from scale (price!) • Focus on extremely fast deployment • Large existing collection of database connectors • Customization and Branding options • Easy administration • One platform to allow resource integration with workflow tools (distance learning, HIS, etc) through a single API Designed with Consortia Customers in Mind

19. What Metasearching CAN Do • Allows the Information Professional to • Design a ‘portal’ into the library’s resources; • Organize the presentation of specific information sources for focused group or subject area (Biotech, Social Sciences, Engineering, etc); • Expand the discovery process through data sampling; • Educate users in the presence of scholarly search tools and allow access to specialised interface tools • Help users properly scope a search

20. Metasearch… NOT • Cannot mine the native databases’ rich search tools • Deduplication - risk removing important citation information from native search UI

21. A Simple View of the Architecture ID/PW, IP etc ID/PW, or ID/PW & IP Connectors (search syntax) Ovid SearchSolver Sources

22. Organize Resources under One Roof – fully under Librarian’s Control

23. Results – A Database

24. Results – Full Text

25. Results – A Web Page

26. In a Nutshell… • Metasearch provides a solid solution for the librarian to control information flow to users and convey the value of using a variety of search sources for discovery. • A common interface for returning sampling of results from many sources • A pathway to the native search application for precision search tools.

27. Ovid’s approach to OpenURL Linking: LinkSolver • ASP model: Online hosting • no technology hassles • Benefit from scale (price!) • Fast and Easy deployment: upgrade from free Links@Ovid product • One-click access to all full text resources from Ovid databases/journals/books, rather than a “landing page” first. • Limit to ALL available full text available from Ovid resources • “Links Packages”: automatic linking from Ovid resources to all Open Access journals • Easy administration • Customization and Branding options • Embargoe support • Global Import / Export function Designed with Consortia Customers in Mind

28. Ovid’s View of eResource Management • Embrace Federated Search as a Discovery Tool • Don’t give up Native Search Engine • precision searching, advanced tools • Invest in an OpenURL Linking Solution to centralize administration of: • electronic holdings • print holdings • document delivery / inter-library Loan • targeted internet resources

29. Journals@Ovid Ovid’s Platform for eResource Management ? ? Discovery Search Seamless Linking Full Text *Logos Owned by Respective Companies

30. Designed with Consortia in mind • Pricing is based on the required solution for the consortia, NOT the number of sites, etc: • Number of database connectors • Customization of interface(s) and branding • Allows for complex account structures and authentication schemes • Administration and customization at different levels (consortia, sub-consortia, institution, department): control in the hands of the customer • High-level support services from specialized sales engineers

31. Discussion • Value of A/I databases? • Google (Scholar)? • Federated Searching • OpenURL LinkResolvers • Ovid’s approach to e-Resource Management? • Pricing models and implementation services?