Extending ejournals to NHS partners (UKSG version)
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•758 views
Slides from a talk I gave at UKSG 2015 conference in Glasgow. Revises talk given at HLG 2014 on same topic. Considers ejournal procurement across NHS and attempts at joint procurement with HE. Looks at how we have addressed improving access and the impact of our actions.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Extending ejournals to NHS partners (UKSG version)
Similar to Extending ejournals to NHS partners (UKSG version) (20)
More from Alan Fricker
More from Alan Fricker (13)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Extending ejournals to NHS partners (UKSG version)
- 1. Extending access to e-journals for NHS partners Alan Fricker – Library Liaison Manager King’s College London Alan.Fricker@kcl.ac.uk
- 2. Summary • Then: NHS staff had the same access to journals as King’s College staff • Disruption: Print to e transition • Now: Taking steps to improve access to academic journals for NHS staff
- 3. King’s Health Partners • One of 5 AHSCs established in 2009 – King’s College London – Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (GSTT) – King’s College Hospital Foundation Trust (KCH) – South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLAM) • King’s College provides the library service for two of the partners in KHP – GSTT and KCH
- 4. Happy days • NHS staff attached to King’s College Libraries have excellent access to paper journals
- 5. Transition • Mid 90s on shift from print journals to ejournals • Excellent onsite access to journals across formats • Sneakernet Extending ejournal access for the NHS – the King’s College London experience
- 6. An electronic (journal) world • Transition of majority of STM to ejournals • UKRR removes 2754 STM titles / 477m in 5 years • Move from equal access to one of disparity • Changing user expectations • Frustration where NHS meets HE
- 7. Result?
- 8. NHS Procurement (in England) • Local efforts to adopt early ejournals • KA24 / regional purchasing (early 2000s) • National Core Content (April 2003 first resources) • Transition in NHS libraries (LHL Strategic Direction 2010-13 aimed for e-only primarily by Jan 2014)
- 9. NHS HE procurement • NHS HE Forum 2002 onwards – Users First (2003) report by John Thornhill pre- empts much that follows: • develop joint HE/NHS licensing • longer contracts – monitored • joint working at all levels • explore common authentication • local and national initiatives • publicise good practice – Two unsuccessful attempts at joint procurement – Hill Report (2008) “great advantages in the NHS and HE working together on joint procurement.”
- 10. London Medical Schools Procurement Group • First established in 2008 • Imperial, King’s College London, QMUL, UCL, St Georges • Consortial purchasing to extend access to affiliated NHS Trusts • Pragmatic and focussed on a small number of key resources • JISC Collections manages negotiations and licensing
- 11. AHSC Pilot 2011-2012 • Participants – Cambridge, UCL, Imperial, KCL, Manchester University – Anonymous, Elsevier, Springer, Nature PG, Thomson Reuters • Key lessons learned – Licensing issues – Low level of NHS usage relative to HEI (0.5%) – Proposed business model: no charge for NHS trusts unless usage in current year exceeds 10%
- 12. Access for the NHS at King’s • Walk in access via NHS account • NHS OpenAthens (National, Regional, LMSPG, local) • Affiliate status granted to some NHS staff • Hard to explain • Hard to promote
- 13. Ejournal desired Free online? Grab it! Registered for OpenAthens? Is it there? Check KCL A-Z Register for OpenAthens Is it there? Do you have KCL affiliate status? Are you eligible for KCL affiliate status? Register for KCL affiliate status Are you registered with the Library? Got the time to come down? Remember login? Time passes Get registered with the Library Time passes Got time for ILL? Are you registered with the Library? Get registered with the Library Order ILL Grab it! Time passes Forget it!
- 14. Unhappiness expressed • GMC Survey red triangles • South London NHS Library Users Survey – Ejournals top priority for improvement – Multiple critical comments • Customer Services staff receive regular negative feedback • Tough time at committees
- 15. Move to action • Discussions with NHS commissioners • Survey of education leads (helped by DME) – Nearly 400 recommendations – Most wanted (Elsevier, Wiley, LWW, BMJ, OUP, Springer) • More outreach needed • Decision to advance by extending NESLI deals
- 16. Interaction with Finch • Finch Report (2012) recommended licence extensions for the NHS: “In the health sector, there is scope for increasing and rationalising arrangements for licensed access across the NHS, and greater coordination with the HE sector” • Part of the context for our discussions • National one-year pilot since April 2014 • Pressure to move faster
- 17. Finch progress • 9 publishers involved (3 overlap) • Pilots drawing to a close • Meetings with publishers ongoing • Opt in model based on usage • Academic Health Sciences Network to sign licence
- 18. Making the case? • Who is in the room? – Health & not health? – Librarian & publisher / supplier? • Librarians - what arguments to advance? • Publishers / suppliers – what would persuade you?
- 19. Our view - 1 • Importance of Finch agenda • For many years King’s journal subscriptions covered both educational and NHS use • Extensions not additional or new subscriptions • Focus on current access
- 20. Our view - 2 • Not undercutting existing NHS subs • No linkage to any departmental subs • Small relative usage – demonstrated by data harvested from AHSC pilot • Mobile access a priority • Scale of OpenAthens registrations
- 21. How did we get on? • Agreements currently with seven publishers • Initially a mixture of pilots and purchases • One new licence (NEJM.org) • Over 6,000 additional titles available via OpenAthens • Discussions with further publishers planned • Gaps remain – limitation of extensions
- 22. Not all plain sailing • Link resolving • Content issues • Authentication – Historic OrgIDs – Publisher system issues – Spelling’s – KCL, KCH, KHP
- 23. Not all plain sailing - 2 • Selling across the divide • Promotion challenge remains
- 24. Impact – users 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Monthly Active Users Monthly Active Users
- 25. Impact - usage • Figures elusive • What to compare? • In line with AHSC pilot • A rising tide • Broad range of titles in use
- 26. GMC Survey: Overall 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 2012 2013 2014 OverallMean% Year Access to Educational Resources GSTT KCH
- 27. Why the difference? • Other questions in overall percentage • Organisational change • Differences between prior expectations • Engagement
- 28. GMC Survey: Access to online journals 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Very good Good Neither good nor poor Poor Very poor Not applicable 2012 KCH 2013 KCH 2014 KCH 2012 GSTT 2013 GSTT 2014 GSTT
- 29. GMC Survey: Access to Library 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Very good Good Neither good nor poor Poor Very poor Not applicable 2012 KCH 2013 KCH 2014 KCH 2012 GSTT 2013 GSTT 2014 GSTT
- 30. Other impacts • Additional work – negotiation, authentication, links • Committee happiness • Service Level Agreement
- 31. The future? • Evaluate impact • Refine current provision • Push more • Long term funding? • Examine other eresources (ebooks?) • Potential of King’s Health Partners? • Extension (where relevant) is the new norm?
- 32. Further reading • AHSC Pilot Report (2012) https://www.jisc-collections.ac.uk/Reports/AHSC-Pilot- Report-August-2012/ • Finch Group (2012) Report of the Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings http://www.researchinfonet.org/publish/finch/ • Hill, P. (2008) Report of a national review of NHS health library services in England : from knowledge to health in the 21st Century. http://www.libraryservices.nhs.uk/document_uploads/NHS_Evidence/national_lib rary_review_final_report_4feb_081.pdf • Spink, S., Urquhart, C., Cox, A. ; Higher Education Academy - Information and Computer Sciences Subject Centre. (2007). Procurement of electronic content across the UK National Health Service and Higher Education sectors. Report to JISC executive and LKDN executive. http://cadair.aber.ac.uk/dspace/handle/2160/310 • Thornhill, J. (2003) Users First http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/docs/usersfirst.pdf
- 33. Thank You Any questions? Alan Fricker Alan.Fricker@kcl.ac.uk
Editor's Notes
- The aim of AHSCs is to bring together world-class research, teaching and clinical practice for the benefit of patients, ensuring that lessons learned from research are applied swiftly and effectively to improve healthcare services on the ground. http://www.kingshealthpartners.org/info/academic-health-sciences There are now 6 AHSCS – UCLPartners, Imperial, King’s, Cambridge and Manchester plus the recently authorised Oxford.
- http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/biomednhs-he.shtml - talks about frustrations back in early 2000s NHS views covered later so this info for background only NHS users have been complaining for some time now. GMC survey from 2011 mentions issues with ejournal access as no access to KCL online. 2011 NHS user survey also talks of dissatisfaction being addressed via AHSC pilot and that findings in this area are consistent with the same survey in 2009. London Health Libraries have had a strategic direction towards eonly since 2010 reflecting the direction of travel across NHS Libraries (http://www.londonlinks.nhs.uk/groups/files/lhlc/LHLStrategicDirection2010-13.pdf) . AHSC pilot and affiliate status as attempts to address dissatisfaction.
- Apologies for non Scottish focus. Generally Scotland well ahead of England. * Local efforts – people worked at different speeds adopting the early options for ejournal access. This was often based on e with print and individual passwords for each title. There were a number of incidents of titles being IP authenticated to the entire NHS via the use of the NHSNet firewall IP address. Local efforts continue and can include subregional consortia (eg South Thames). KA24 (Knowledge Access 24 started in 2002 to provide e access to a selection of databases and journals across the NHS in London and the South East. Aimed for more equitable access for those previously less well served, better value and more consistency. Similar projects elsewhere in the country. SWICE, HEROIN, etc generally Via Ovid. Q. What does KA24 include? * Databases: Medline, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Embase, CancerLit, HMIC, AMED, British Nursing Index, Evidence-Based Medicine reviews * Journals: About 200 full text titles * Textbooks: Full text of 8 medical textbooks * National Core Content – Suite of databases via Dialog. Small collection of ejournals. Regional funding pooled to pay for it. Some regional purchasing continued (and does to this day) – “the London topup” Project agreed early 2002 and launched April 2003. Savings through joint procurement and in training users with one system across England. Athens Authenticated.
- Selected recommendations from Thornill - Some have got further than others! Reasons for failure of joint procurements – *OA publisher could not manage the Business Model being proposed for article publication payments proposed for article publication payments *NHS withdrew funding, preferring to undertake NHS-only deals via the National Library for Health Specifics - No agreement was possible over the joint procurement of the commercial content between the JISC and the NKS. Why was this so? A number of reasons and issues were identified: the journals did not meet NKS quality standards for the reporting of clinical trials (CONSORT, Quorum etc.) the range of eligible users excluded a number of groups supported by NKS the differential value of the journals to the NHS and the HE sectors was not included in the contract there was no provision for the FE sector to be included in the procurement JISC had not included the FE sector because the Learning and Skills Council no longer funds the JISC's content activities NHS procurements above �100,000 generally require open competition the NKS was and is fully committed to the principle of joint procurement provided this approach brings value to the NHS Image – a meeting from 2007 looking to the future of journals in the NHS – the future happened a few years back now
- Resources - The resources jointly procured include up to 300 ejournals (Lippincott Total Collection and PsycARTICLES), 10 ebooks (Oxford Textbooks), and other resources such as Clinical Evidence, the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin and Best Treatments. At the local level, each institution is able to top up with additional resources – for example more textbooks – using the same expanded licence. http://www.londonlinks.nhs.uk/events/files/events/nhs-he-partnership/Betsy%20Anagnostelis_poster.pdf https://community.ja.net/system/files/515/November2013_NHS-HEForum_BA%20(2).pdf – Nov 2013 update from Betsy to NHS-HE Forum
- https://www.jisc-collections.ac.uk/Reports/AHSC-Pilot-Report-August-2012/ Pilot programme jointly established in February 2011 between JC, AHSCs and major STM publishers. Has provided a good foundation for possibilities going forward. Authentication went OK Licences varied across the participants – issues where not all wish to proceed. Hard to compare usage data but was low compared to HEI Models – based on not charging where usage increase is below a certain amount (10%) and fee not above 5%
- Confusing for NHS staff who don’t understand the complexities of the situation. NHS staff with different levels of access (e.g. affiliate and non-affiliate) which leads to dissatisfaction and misunderstanding.
- Green for Yes, Red for no, black for nah. umpteen places to give up
- Red triangles = significantly below the benchmark group SLLIB Users Survey – run every couple of years across NHS users in South London. 2013 was last running. 2013 was also when I started at King’s
- Raising awareness of what is already available as well as extending access to a greater range of content. DME gave very vigorous prompting in one Trust resulting in responses predominantly from that organisation
- “The Finch report” was published in June 2012 and followed a year’s work from the Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings. The report asserted that research results should be freely available in the public domain and recommended that there should be action to further build on the work undertaken during the AHSC pilot to extend access to licensed ejournal content to the health sector. The result of this is a one-year funded trial which will inform JISC Collections, publishers and NHS libraries about future decisions about relevant access and/or pricing models for NHS users to extend the existing JISC Collections’ NESLi2 licence agreements. Number of publishers approached are listed here: http://www.jisc-collections.ac.uk/news/NHS-ITT-issued/. We did not know what would happen and what would be included and needed to respond to our users.
- Participants AAAS – 2 titles – Science Translational Medicine and Science Signaling Annual Reviews - 26 titles in the Biomedical/Life Sciences Elsevier – 147 scientific research titles IOP Publishing – over 100 titles Karger – 130 titles Nature Publishing Group – 70 titles including the title Nature Oxford University Press – 88 titles from the Medical Collection Royal Society of Chemistry – 57 titles Springer – nearly 2000 journal titles
- * Post-its around a table – go to one side or the other then swap Swap over to get the perspective from the other side Add arguments you might have expected them to make
- Finch – this is the tide and we are swimming ahead of it Journal subs carried by Library Services have for many years covered both educational and NHS use (with no other central NHS library facilities provided) therefore extension of the terms of the licence should not constitute an entirely new subscription. Same terms / period as HE, include backfile, ignore any odds and sods of print not in our control Current is key for this group
- Journal subs carried by Library Services have for many years covered both educational and NHS use (with no other central NHS library facilities provided) therefore extension of the terms of the licence should not constitute an entirely new subscription. - Same terms / period as HE, include backfile, ignore any odds and sods of print not in our control
- Link resolver – quality of knowledge base (hard to get the right titles). Less experience of OCLC product. Content issues – not always the things we were expecting, both NHS trusts should have same access – did not always come out that way Authentication – old accounts confuse things, cannot attach more than one OrgID to a single publishers account, collections change over time – what is extended?, Apostrophe issue, confusion with overlapping and similar organisation names
- Link resolver – quality of knowledge base (hard to get the right titles). Less experience of OCLC product. Authentication – old accounts confuse things, cannot attach more than one OrgID to a single publishers account, collections change over time – what is extended?, Apostrophe issue, confusion with overlapping and similar organisation names Unexplainable variations – both NHS trusts should have same access – did not always come out that way
- Happy users - feedback
- Stats – rather early and not all giving us stats yet. Hard to separate NHS from HE but where we can it is still low 0.5 versus KCL. Third of titles used from one multi disciplinary bundle But half have fewer than one download per month