The Journal of the Dermatology Nurses’ Association and the Maternity and Infant Care Database from MIDIRS are freely accessible during the month of May in celebration of Nurses’ Week (which Ovid is turning into Nurses’ Month for the purpose of this promotion).
Access requires signup for each resource; click the links above or access the links via the Promotions tab on the Ovid site.
I wasn’t entirely sure what the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA) would look like when the long-awaited launch date of April 18 approached. The suspense is finally over: it looks great.
The DPLAs not going to be a digital version of your local public library’s collections and services – at least, not yet. It is trying to do three things right now: pull together digital assets from major national and regional digital collections into a well-organized, unified, easily searchable portal; provide digital tools and metadata that others can use to build new applications; and provide national leadership in the effort to encourage open and collective access to our shared cultural record.
Last night we mentioned that Oxford University Press will provide free access in North and South America to the Oxford English Dictionary and Oxford Reference to celebrate National Library Week that begins on Sunday.
I don’t know that the selected materials will be much help for reference questions, but some of them are fun to poke around in. :)
Finding free quality images is a tedious task - mainly due to copyright issues, attribution requirements, or simply lack of quality. This inspired us to create Pixabay - a repository for outstanding public domain images.
You can freely use any image from this website in digital and printed format, for personal and commercial use, without attribution requirement to the original author.
The Art Works Blog (from the National Endowment for the Arts Blog) offers a brief intro to the Public Art Archive database and talks with with Rachel J. Cain, the program manager of the Public Art Archive, and Anthony Radich, the executive director of WESTAF.
This looks like a neat resource for those interested in public art installations.
Here’s a cool, easy to use, free, and potentially useful keyword searchable database developed by Michael Donohoe that you might want to share, bookmark, or catalog and add to a locally developed collection of web resources.
As you enter letters into the search box the database dynamically returns NY Times clues/answers.
The database contains 432,205 NY Times clues published in The Times from 1996-2011.
(description from INFOdocket)
“Are you tired of searching for yourself in Google Scholar, Scopus, or Academic Search Complete and finding other people who share your family name? This is a serious problem for researchers, whose reputations rest on their publication history. Many researchers are working on ways to separate the agronomist Dr. Jones from the medical Dr. Jones from the archeologist Dr. Jones. ORCID, a registry that will assign a unique ID to each author, is now live. But assigning a unique ID isn’t going to help unless EVERYONE uses that ID. Up until now, different companies and products have assigned ID numbers to their authors, but nobody else uses those numbers. That’s how authors have ended up with a Scopus ID, a ResearcherID, and a different institutional ID.”
This has great potential. Scopus has been trying to do something like this for a while, but there are problems with the algorithms they use (how an author’s location is displayed can change from article to article, for instance, which can result in duplicate author profiles) and the Scopus database certainly doesn’t include everything anyway.
It will be interesting to see whether ORCID is widely adopted or not.
Work is currently underway to transition the ArchiveGrid database of archival collection descriptions from a subscription service to a free service on a new interface developed and managed by OCLC Research.
A beta version of the new interface developed by OCLC Research is available at no charge at http://beta.worldcat.org/archivegrid/. This beta has been designed to support OCLC’s efforts to expand support for this type of data, engaging with the library/archive community as we work together to create more sustainable ways to grow the collection of data and represent it appropriately in WorldCat.
As one of the people at my library who usually ends up answering history-type questions, I’m having fun poking around the beta site. :)
Dear fellow librarians, people who are returning to education as adults are easily scared away by overly complicated messages. Think about the content, timing and delivery of your messages from your customers and potential customers perspective, not from your own perspective. If you make them feel stupid or scare them off the first time they hear about you they are unlikely to ever come back because they have plenty of other ways to get just enough information that is just good enough for their purposes. Except for the very small number who are planning to take library courses they just do not need to know what a nested Boolean search is, most especially they do not need to know it in week one of their three or four year degree.
I would say that almost everyone is scared away by overly complicated messages, especially when it comes to them needing to find information to complete a task. (There’s a reason that Google is the prominent search engine! How much simpler can you get?)
Given that library systems are rather dumb on their own, librarians have been forced to focus so much effort on absurdly long and/or specific search strategies just to make the system cough up something even remotely relevant. Which is sad and somewhat pathetic. We as a profession should be able to do better than that by now. (And why are these things being taught when the search option provided by the library doesn’t even accept them? Something is wrong there.)
The author name disambiguation process compares citations with the same author name. The similarity for each citation pair is measured by examining the metadata for both citations, such as co-authors, journal, title, affiliation, abstract, MeSH terms, grants, and publication date. Citations that share like author names are divided into different groups by clustering the citations that are highly similar to each other. Citations within each group are then classified as belonging to the same author.
This should be interesting to try out… author disambiguation is a tricky business.
Since most people tend to publish in their own area of expertise this should be helpful. The only thing you have to do is make sure you account for those times where they publish outside of their usual field.
Oh, look, it’s actually Thursday now! :) It’s also the last day I have this week to really get stuff done—tomorrow I’m only working a half-day and have a ref desk shift and an all-hands meeting, so I won’t have much time to focus.
And that’s it for me today.
Ah, Tuesday… somehow this morning I got confused and fleetingly thought it was Thursday (if only!).
eReaderLookup.com is a database of ebook reader devices that has quick filtering and comparison capabilities.
This website was created to facilitate the research of ebook readers. Today it is sometimes difficult to make an informed choice based on marketing campaigns of big corporations, although there might be ereaders offering much more at the same or better price.
This site offers you facts about ereaders and allows you to easily find the devices that match your parameters. Some of the information is being obtained from device manufacturers and reviews; some is being contributed by website users.
Librarians are knocking on wood when it comes to their electronic resources. The Penguin saga is just one more example that we need a course correction in how we’re approaching this issue. The problem isn’t Penguin. They are a for-profit company and are acting in their own best interest. The problem isn’t Overdrive. They are also a for-profit company and also acting in their own best interest. The problem is we have jumped into this marketplace without knowledge and we keep expecting other companies to take care of us. We expect Overdrive (and Penguin, and Simon & Schuster, and Macmillan, and…) to be on our side, to make sure we are protected, when that is our job. It is our job to spend the money entrusted to us by our taxpayers. It is our job to make sure libraries and librarians are not cut out of the emerging digital marketplace. It is our job to make sure that the protections we have (First Sale Doctrine, Fair Use, etc) go forward and don’t disappear.
But… by the same token that these instructors are specialists in their fields, the reference librarians are specialists in library reference. No instructor in the university knows the databases as well as the reference librarians, or the ways the citations sometimes fail to surface in one way but come back in a different way. Nobody knows the resources of the library better than the librarians, and those resources aren’t always obvious, or in the library.