RE: Simultaneous users models

[Harvey Brenneise <HBrenne@MPHI.org>]

One solution which a group of medical libraries in Michigan have found
(with Stat!Ref) is to pool our simultaneous users among all of us (40
users at present), which tends to statistically "smooth out" usage.  In
addition, the vendor has guaranteed that they would not lock anyone out,
but if there were significant over usage, that would be an indication in
the following year's contract negotiations that it was time to move to the
next step (with them 60).  This seems to be fair to both sides.  
Incidentally, the vendor in this case (Teton Data Systems) admitted that
many libraries "overbuy" simultaneous users, particularly on the "low end"
(for example, few want to risk 1 but the next step is 5, which is
overkill).

Harvey Brenneise
Michigan Public Health Institute
hbrenne@mphi.org

-----Original Message-----
From: Abbott, Bruce [mailto:babbot@lsuhsc.edu]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:40 PM
To: 'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'
Subject: RE: Simultaneous users models

I have always found discussions with regard to simultaneous use to divide
(in the academic medical environment) with regards to basic science
(academic) use and clinical (patient care) use.  Medical librarians (in my
experience) confronted with this issue seem to agree that the possibility
of being locked out temporarily for an academic pursuit is something that
has to be balanced with costs and budget, while resources that are used
primarily for patient care should have unlimited use models.

Discussions over MicroMedex (a drug and toxicology service), MEDLINE, online
medical books (from MD Consult, Stat-Ref, and now Stanford's Skolar) have a
real edge--how do we ensure adequate access for patient care.  Discussions
having to do with databases such as Dissertation Abstracts, ERIC, etc.,
don't have the same edge--yes we can accept a limited number of user
licenses.

Journal access is the real sticking point.  Having single user access to a
clinical journal seems unlikely to provide patient care issues, but where
are the studies or statistics that bear this out.

The one exception I will take with Mark's points (with which I agree) is
that for print items, we do have reference (or library use only) policies.
That does not address after hours access, but does provide that items are
available when needed.

Bruce Abbott
babbot@lsuhsc.edu