1. How do you nurse your journal collection? Drea Eskildsen Stenbaek Health Information Services, the Library DACEHTA

2. National Board of Health – established 1909 Operational tasks E.g. certification and licensing of health care professionals; hospital planning Monitoring tasks: E.g. running and development of patient and disease registries Advisory tasks: E.g. Minister and Parliament, counties and municipalities; information campaigns to the public Developmental tasks: E.g. health technology assessment; evaluation; clinical guidelines

3. Why a study of the journal collection? Major purpose of the library is to support the use of literature based documentation in solving the Boards tasks (developmental, advisory) Requires the library to follow the development in the Boards need for documentation and information Do we have the right journals?

4. Objectives Ensure ressource efficiency Ensure relevancy of content of journal collection according to needs Ensure compliance of journal collection with the strategic and professional development of the Board Establish process model regarding evaluation of journal collection Contribute to future policy-making regarding maintenance of journal collection

5. Methods Quantitative Usage statistics (circulation, TOC alerts, loans, downloads) Electronic questionnaire (satisfaction, expectations, needs) Qualitative Comparative analysis (interview with 5 libraries) Focus group interview (heavy library users representing different departments of the Board)

6. Results: usage statistics Small group of heavy users responsible for 30% of circulation 19 journals represent 47% of TOC alerts 332 articles from 94 journals (12%) downloaded from our Elsevier journal package (16,76 ) 41 articles from 21 journals (4%) downloaded from our Springer journal package (26,14 )

7. Results: electronic questionnaire 55% dont use e-journals (33% dont know why, 27% dont need journals, 21% prefer print) Large variation in relevant/interesting subject areas Difficult to point at specific journals to subscribe to / cancel High degree of satisfaction with journal collection and service of the librarians Lower degree of satisfaction with library intranet and availability of journals

8. Results: comparative analysis None has overall strategy for maintenance / development of journal collection Most have chosen democratic model (researchers / library committee work out future directions and action plans) One makes strategic choices on the basis of a SWOT analysis All use usage statistics and user requests in decision making

9. Results: focus group interview Conflicting demands: journal collection must possess professional depth and breadth vs. demands of the users Panel could discuss conflicting demands Strategy should be flexible but not subject to popularity criterion – consideration for demand should be combined with professional debate Active dialogue with users important Library should be more visible, market itself more, improve availability of e-journals

10. Recommendations for a 3 pillar process model Quantitative monitoring (loan statistics, utilization, user satisfaction) Economic considerationsQualitative assessment (ensure importance and relevancy to present and future activities based on professional priorities to avoid purely demand-driven decisions)

11. Action plan for the library Strategic goals, e.g.: Prioritize electronic services more Attract new/more users Eliminate unnecessary administrative procedures and inappropriate utilization of resources Competence development plan for the librarians

12. What then? Marketing (visibility, new/more users) individual library introductions, department visits (dialogue with users and non-users) Availability of e-journals new journal administration system Library intranet better position on Board intranet, reorganization of library pages

13. Conclusion Quantitative data cannot stand alone, not possible to set out rigid criteria for the journal selection A rarely used journal may be a core journal within a high- priority but small area Only few employees engaged in many subject areas results in low usage statistics Subject areas of priority constantly change because of political demands to the Board Must be supplemented by qualitative assessments which requires active dialogue with the users to ensure compliance with strategic and professional development of the Board