RE: NEJM

["Rick Anderson" <rickand@unr.edu>]

> Don't judge this by averages.

The only way to judge use of an entire collection is by averages.  What
would be foolish would be to make a decision about an individual title
based on averages.

> Most current issues are not read at all,
> and some are read a great deal. This does not have any correlation to
> their eventual use. For most of the really important journals in the
> sciences, the individual issues are so large that few people would
> attempt to scan them for current awareness. There are better ways to do
> this, both print and electronic. For most of the literature, the
> article, not the journal issue, is the unit that is actually used.

Well, right, but in print format there's no way to get to the article
without taking the issue off the shelf.  What we're finding in my
institution is that only half of the issues on our shelves ever get taken
off even once.  Use is use, and most print issues are not getting used,
whether for current awareness or for individual articles.  Obviously,
those journals that are really important to our patrons are getting
relatively heavy use, and our decisions in regard to those titles will be
shaped by that fact.

-------------
Rick Anderson
Director of Resource Acquisition
The University Libraries
University of Nevada, Reno        "The only thing worse than a
1664 No. Virginia St.              silly politician analyzing
Reno, NV  89557                    art is a silly artist
PH  (775) 784-6500 x273            analyzing politics."
FX  (775) 784-1328                     -- Jonathan Alter
rickand@unr.edu