BACKGROUND: Journal usage studies, which are useful for budget management and for evaluating collection performance relative to library use, have generally described a single library or subject discipline. The Southern Chapter/Medical Library Association (SC/MLA) study has examined journal usage at the aggregate data level with the long-term goal of developing hospital library benchmarks for journal use. METHODS: Thirty-six SC/MLA hospital libraries, categorized for the study by size as small, medium, or large, reported current journal title use centrally for a one-year period following standardized data collection procedures. Institutional and aggregate data were analyzed for the average annual frequency of use, average costs per use and non-use, and average percent of non-used titles. Permutation F-type tests were used to measure difference among the three hospital groups. RESULTS: Averages were reported for each data set analysis. Statistical tests indicated no significant differences between the hospital groups, suggesting that benchmarks can be derived applying to all types of hospital libraries. The unanticipated lack of commonality among heavily used titles pointed to a need for uniquely tailored collections. CONCLUSION: Although the small sample size precluded definitive results, the study's findings constituted a baseline of data that can be compared against future studies.
BACKGROUND: Journal usage studies, which are useful for budget management and for evaluating collection performance relative to library use, have generally described a single library or subject discipline. The Southern Chapter/Medical Library Association (SC/MLA) study has examined journal usage at the aggregate data level with the long-term goal of developing hospital library benchmarks for journal use. METHODS: Thirty-six SC/MLA hospital libraries, categorized for the study by size as small, medium, or large, reported current journal title use centrally for a one-year period following standardized data collection procedures. Institutional and aggregate data were analyzed for the average annual frequency of use, average costs per use and non-use, and average percent of non-used titles. Permutation F-type tests were used to measure difference among the three hospital groups. RESULTS: Averages were reported for each data set analysis. Statistical tests indicated no significant differences between the hospital groups, suggesting that benchmarks can be derived applying to all types of hospital libraries. The unanticipated lack of commonality among heavily used titles pointed to a need for uniquely tailored collections. CONCLUSION: Although the small sample size precluded definitive results, the study's findings constituted a baseline of data that can be compared against future studies.