Web-based Loansome Doc, librarians, and end users: results from a survey of the Southeast Region.

OBJECTIVES: The study examines how Loansome Doc services are implemented and used by libraries in the Southeast Region and describe end users' experiences with and attitudes toward Loansome Doc. METHODS: 251 active DOCLINE libraries and 867 Loansome Doc users were surveyed. RESULTS: Roughly one half of the libraries offered Loansome Doc services. Of those that did not, most indicated no plans to offer it in the future. The majority had a small number of end users and experienced minimal increases in interlibrary loan activity. Problems were relatively rare. Satisfaction with Loansome Doc was high among all types of libraries. End users were usually physicians or other health care professionals who requested articles for research and patient care. Most learned about Loansome Doc through PubMed or Internet Grateful Med. End users appeared to be largely self-taught or received informal instruction in Loansome Doc. Loansome Doc filled document requests in a timely manner, and end users reported being satisfied with the service. CONCLUSIONS: Greater promotion of what Loansome Doc is and how it can benefit libraries can increase the number of participating libraries. While satisfaction of Loansome Doc end users is high, satisfaction could be increased with more help on the PubMed screen, more library training, and faster delivery methods.

Promotion of health information access via Grateful Med and Loansome Doc: why isn't it working?

Information gathered from Grateful Med and Loansome Doc outreach projects, including one involving seven health centers in rural southwest Alabama, raises questions about the effectiveness of such programs. This paper presents a review of the literature on Grateful Med as well as of information access and usage behaviors of physicians, an overview of the Alabama project, and data from other projects. Analysis of the responses and observations of the researchers reveal some strategies for enhancing the outcomes of such projects and improving access to medical care literature by health care professionals at rural sites.

Comparison of fixed-fee Grateful Med database use and searching success rates given the continued availability of MEDLINE in other formats.

This study compared in-house Grateful Med database use and searching success rates for four-month periods at four sites of the Library of the Health Sciences of the University of Illinois at Chicago. Data were collected from Grateful Med workstation uselogs and analyzed. Database use patterns and searching success rates were fairly consistent across the four sites. Though MEDLINE was available in other formats and use in these other formats remained high, 65.48% of all Grateful Med searching was done by using MEDLINE, and an additional 21.34% was done by using the MEDLINE Backfiles. In-house use patterns were similar to the overall use pattern for the University of Illinois, with the exception of MEDLINE Backfiles. Overall, 54.30% of searches were successful.