Abstract
SFX, an OpenURL Link resolver, was implemented at the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library (UIUC) in late 2005. Data from the SFX
statistical reporting package are providing yet another look at how library users
navigate and utilize electronic resources. However, unlike other statistical reports,
such as e-use statistics provided by vendors, SFX data cover both successful
and unsuccessful links, meaning that libraries can identify items patrons wanted,
but which were not (for some reason) available. And while SFX cannot totally
replicate use data from publishers (since it cannot track bookmarked links
resulting from use outside the library’s links) it can provide statistical use data in
place of publishers who simply do not offer this service, which often includes
smaller or more specialized publishers. SFX data also cover multiple databases
and vendors, combining use and non-use data in one statistical package. This
paper provides an overview of the twenty established statistical reports available
through the SFX statistics module. Suggestions are offered for how the data
from these reports can be used to answer questions about how academic journal
collections and their indexes are being used and what users need, but are not
finding.
Introduction
Imagine knowing what full text electronic journals your library paid for last
year, but were never or seldom used. Consider the value of a list of the top 100
electronic journals your patrons wanted, but could not access. This information
can be easily obtained with the basic SFX statistical reporting package.
SFX , conceived and created in the early 21st Century, has made
considerable market headway and is now implemented in literally thousands of
libraries “in 24 countries and 6 continents” (SFX Website). SFX is defined on its
website as:
“ - the original OpenURL link resolver – <SFX> is an innovative tool for
interconnecting library-controlled resources and services. SFX provides
users with context-sensitive links to services that librarians define on the
basis of their institution's e-collections and policies. Such services, which
are dynamically created, can include links to the full text of an article, the
OPAC (for local holdings), preferred document-delivery suppliers, related
Web-based resources and services, local information repositories, and a
range of other services” (SFX Website).
Implementation of SFX in U.S. academic libraries has, for the most part,
been the responsibility of technical service librarians who have activated sources
and targets in order to make SFX work efficiently. One small piece of the
implementation is the statistical reporting package that is a dynamic part of every
installation – electronic journal and index use statistics literally start collecting on
the very day SFX is implemented.
Aside from helping patrons navigate SFX’s capabilities, public service
librarians who are not involved in SFX implementation often have limited
interactions with the inner workings of SFX and may not be aware that a broad
set of statistics are available. Information concerning user behavior and
collection use is of tremendous value for the assessment of both library services
and collections. The bottom line here is: if your library uses SFX, you have SFX
statistics.
The more complex components of SFX statistics are not covered in this
general overview. Your SFX Administrator has the capability to set up metadata
within the SFX programming modules to alter some of the options within the SFX
statistics requesting pages. The extensive customization allowed by SFX means
2
that some SFX users will have different options for data filters and output on their
data requesting pages than those discussed in this overview. However, the
standard and predetermined list of twenty statistical questions remains the same
for each SFX library.
The jargon associated with SFX can limit the usefulness of the software;
however the twenty predetermined reports can shed light on the use and non-use
of high-profile e-resources. As with any statistical measure, the longer the data
have been collected, the more easily trends can be determined. However,
analyzing SFX’s statistical output can be challenging. The more you understand
the logic of SFX, the better you will understand what you are seeing in the
statistical spreadsheets. One of the best uses of the data is to uncover errors in
how SFX has been set up by your library, by the publisher or by the vendor.
Problems are often revealed when outliers or incongruous data are found. These
challenges and problems will be addressed later in this paper.
Due to copyright restrictions, screen shots of specific queries, results and
examples are not able to be included in this article. Consult with your SFX Site
Administrator for access to the statistical module and follow along as this paper
provides a primer for learning to use SFX statistics for your institution.
Previous Research
Although SFX has existed for nearly a decade, the literature has focused
primarily on the technical aspects of implementation, using SFX for collection
development and a few articles on user satisfaction. There are also numerous
short news articles published each year reporting on the latest library or consortia
to purchase and implement SFX.
Articles that address the technical background and applications of SFX
include those by Robertson and Soderdahl, Twiss-Brooks, Curran and Holman.
3
Possibly the best overview is by Cochenour, Jaramillo and Wilde. They walk
readers through the SFX basics, covering all the information needed to get
started with SFX including terminology, the Knowledge Base, staffing
implications and customization. The Robertson and Soderdahl article provides an
overview of the technical workings of SFX and addresses its basic capabilities
and terminology. Twiss-Brooks discusses the implementation of SFX at the
University of Chicago, but before the SFX upgrade released in 2003 which
resulted in a more robust statistical component. Curran’s article is a more
current (2006) editorial on using SFX to organize serial management through the
use of “Monthly Text Reports.” Curran provides specific instructions for using
these reports to update new and dropped serial titles, in essence using SFX to
methodically clean up serial records - an often onerous task made simple
through the use of SFX. Holman describes the University of Wisconsin-La
Crosse Library’s adaptation of SFX as a “homegrown periodicals holding list”
using the SFX Knowledge Base.
A study of the expectations and impressions of SFX both by librarians and
users was conducted by Wakimoto, Walker and Dabbour. Their article contains
an overview of SFX that reviews the literature to 2005 and includes early articles
describing the first days of openURL linking in libraries. The authors, from two
California State University System (CSU) Libraries, surveyed end-users in 2004
and not surprisingly found that users wanted faster linking to more full text
articles. Librarians’ expectations were measured in focus groups, finding that
although not yet perfected and with some concerns about accuracy, SFX was a
good linking tool with a great deal of potential. In a separate study, use statistics
were collected and showed the clickthrough rates for full text (65.2%), to the
online catalog (23.8%), and to ILL (8.4%). As noted later in the definitions
section, a clickthrough rate is the ratio between the number of requests made
and the number of successful links to an article using the SFX link resolver.
In a 2003 study of SFX use and usability, Cummings and Johnson
reviewed local SFX statistics to document journal use; they noted that in the early
4
implementation years of SFX, these statistics helped librarians to realize that
users were interested in linking technology and would find even obtusely-labeled
buttons (“SFX”) to locate full text. The benefits of the SFX statistical reporting
package became immediately evident to librarians working with the
implementation of the product. The only problem was waiting a suitable period of
time for data to accrue.
Despite the obvious benefits of using SFX statistics to inform collection
development, only a few articles have addressed this topic. Stengel published
what appears to be the first such article in 2004. Results from this study found
California State University at San Marcos users had clickthrough rates of 78%
(full text), 40% (holdings/online catalog) and 17.5% (interlibrary loan). A higher
ILL request rate was expected, but not experienced. Stengel cites similar
findings which showed undergraduates are more likely to use journals at their
library and avoid the longer wait for ILL materials. Stengel rightly points out in his
conclusions that SFX data are often good at determining high-use journals,
thereby demonstrating need, but do not measure the quality or value of a journal.
As with all statistics, a judicious, thoughtful analysis using multiple data sets is
important. Gallagher, Bauer and Dollar used SFX use data as one of several
measures to determine print cancellation decisions. SFX data on 3,465
MEDLINE-indexed titles found 14.8% were not used during the second quarter of
2004. Rogers-Urbanek’s web page replicates a presentation she made in 2006.
This source provides an excellent overview with graphics that show what SFX
statistics web pages look like, some definitions of terms, and the “most obvious”
reports to be used for collection development purposes.
Distinct from the current literature on SFX, which focuses on introductions
and data analyses, the unique purpose of this article is to increase awareness
and use of the SFX statistics module. New potential users such as assessment,
collection or public service librarians, who might not be aware of the broad array
of data collection parameters possible with SFX statistics module, are here
5
introduced to the basics of this module. This primer serves the reader by
explaining the terminology, how-tos and statistical descriptions of the twenty SFX
statistical reports, providing needed instruction and guidance to the novice user.
Terminology
SFX has developed terms to describe its processes. Although not intuitive,
SFX terminology is fairly easy to learn. The abbreviated glossary below gives
brief definitions. Terminology can be tricky, so for the most up-to-date
information it is best to consult the SFX User Guide. Your SFX administrator
should be able to provide you with an ID and Password to gain access.
SOURCE: Resources that have been enabled for OpenURL. For example,
SciFinder Scholar is a SOURCE. A list of sources can be found at
http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/SFXSources
TARGET: Full text options such as those available from e-journal publishers, but
also including options such as library catalogs and databases. For example, the
American Chemical Society e-journals package is a TARGET. A partial list of
SFX targets can be found at http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/SFXTargets
SERVICE: Options within TARGETS. This includes services such as
“getHolding” or “getWebSearch.” Query 15 reports those services preferred over
getFullTxt.
OBJECTS: The title of a journal, book, etc. For example, The Journal of the
American Chemical Society is an OBJECT.
REQUEST: Clicking on the SFX button in a SOURCE is a REQUEST. A
REQUEST generates an OpenURL that is sent to SFX. Upon receiving an
OpenURL, SFX produces a screen (the SFX Services Menu) from which to
6
choose options such as full text. A REQUEST only means that a person has
asked for further information that SFX can provide, the presence of an SFX
button does not guarantee the availability of full text.
CLICKTHROUGH: When a patron selects a link in the SFX Services Menu to
link out to a TARGET, that action results in a CLICKTHROUGH.
CLICKTHROUGH RATE: The ratio between a REQUEST and a
CLICKTHROUGH. The higher the clickthrough rate, the better, meaning that
patrons have reviewed their options and then choose to access either full text,
interlibrary loan, or other services made available to them via SFX. However,
this ratio can be misleading. When multiple options show up, the clickthrough
rate will be affected. If, for example, there are four options for full text and only
one is selected, the rate will show a higher “no-clickthrough” rate (3 of 4) and
only one successful clickthrough. It is also possible, but rare, to see the
clickthroughs higher than the requests for a title. This occurs when an open page
with the SFX link is reused; another scenario where clickthroughs are higher than
requests would be when a request is made, but the menu has more than one
option to choose from. The user tries several of those options before actually
getting through to the article, resulting in multiple clickthroughs from a single
request.
Getting Started
The first step in creating SFX reports is to obtain the URL for your “SFX
Admin Center” and your institutional login and password. Your SFX
administrator can provide you with this information. SFX allows for a generic
login that limits non-administrative users to viewing and downloading, so there’s
no reason not to get started - you can’t do any harm beyond generating reports.
7
Running some of the longer reports can take time. During report creation,
a new window is opened, allowing other, non-SFX, tasks to be conducted while
waiting for results. If your institution is large, it may be necessary to have the
SFX administrator set the default time for report creation to a longer setting. We
found that for the UIUC library, all reports can be run in 15 minutes or less. Some
take only a few minutes, but obviously, the larger the data set, the longer it can
take to produce results. If an error message occurs while running a report, it is
likely that the time length is set too low for your location. Reports can also be
scheduled for automated email delivery, saving time and allowing for easy
sharing of this information. Only one report can be generated from a single
user/computer at one time. If multiple reports are needed, using the automated
email delivery capability is the best option. Another tip is to use the option for a
scheduled report and set it to run within a few minutes of the current time (about
5 minutes from the current time). Once you’ve pulled the information from that
report, it is easy to go back and cancel the request so it won’t run again the
following day, week or month at the same time. It is also possible to generate a
report too large to be returned to you. These are instead sent as link to the
ExLibris server, and those reports need to be retrieved by an SFX Administrator.
Filling Out a Request Form
Nineteen of the 20 reports have four major areas from which to select
options: Query Parameters, Dates to Query, Filters and Output. The exception is
Query 16, which by design is limited to one parameter (unused full text journals),
so the option to select the parameters is not available in that Query. Options
within these four major areas change depending on the query purpose.
Query Parameters
Options are “Total by” and occasionally “Show” which limits returns by “top
10, 50 or 100.” Some queries already have the parameters pre-set as
part of that particular query (see Query 16 for example).
8
Dates to Query
There are usually two options for dates to query. The first (default) option
is “Relative Date Range,” which includes options such as “Today,
Yesterday, This Week, Last Week, This month, Last Month, This Year,
Last Year.” The second option is “Specific Date Range,” which allows you
to choose specific ranges. Remember that you cannot get data for times
when SFX has not been in use at your institution, and even choosing “last
year” might result in a partial year if you did not have SFX implemented for
the entire twelve months.
Filters
The different filters, “Institute, Formats, Usergroup, Faculty, IP Address”
are not always available options, but they are viewable. The defaults for
these options are the best way to begin. This area is best left “as is”
(accepting the defaults) as you begin running statistics. The option to
“Exclude” each of these filters is available, if for example, you want to
eliminate a certain user group, IP address, format, etc. from your statistical
report.
Output.
Format and Delivery are the two fields with options for how your results
can be delivered. Format has two options, HTML and Plain-text, and
Delivery has two options, Screen and Email. The default is for HTML
delivered to your screen.
The Twenty Standard SFX Statistical Reports
1. Number of SFX requests and clickthroughs per day. The first report is
the most basic. This report shows the number of times users have clicked on the
9
SFX button across all sources. The time period can be specified and set for
different coverage periods. Selecting “month” or “year” will result in the totals for
the current month-to-date and the current year-to-date. This report provides a
nice overview of SFX activity.
2. Number of SFX requests and clickthroughs per source. This report
compares the the number of times an SFX button is clicked on in a database, A
& I service, OPAC or other source and the number of times a target is clicked
through in the SFX menu. Only sources that have activity for the requested time
period will be displayed, and of course only those sources that link to SFX for
your institution will be included. This report is customizable by day, week, month
and year.
3. Number of SFX requests and clickthroughs sorted by object type. The
number of times a particular format has been requested and clicked can be
accessed through this report. The object types include article, book, book item,
conference, dissertation, issue, journal, newspaper, proceeding, report and
series. At this broad level, the distributions are interesting but do not provide
further information about user need.
4. Number of SFX requests and clickthroughs per service type.
There are twenty-two service types. Examples include: cited journal, document
delivery, DOI (Digital Object Identifier), Full text, Holding, Message No Full text,
Reference, Selected Full text, and Web Search. The service type report tracks
the number of requests and clickthroughs for each of these commands,
determined by selected time period. Very similar to Query 3, except for service
type, offering a broad overview and a sense of what types of services your users
are using most often.
5. Number of SFX requests with/without full text services. Query 5 requires
the selection of a source, for example SciFinder Scholar (in SFX labeled as
“info:sid/CAS: CAPLUS”). Within that source, the data returned show which
requests had or did not have full text availability. Only a number is returned,
with no further detailed data provided. Compilations can be requested by day,
month or year.
10
6. Top target services shown in the SFX menu. Query 6 ranks each target
and service by frequency. For example, the top three at the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign on June 27, 2008 were: REFWORKS_EXPORT_TOOL
getReference , GOOGLE_SCHOLAR getWebSearch, and DOCDEL_ILLIAD
getDocumentDelivery. This query displays only requests, not clickthroughs.
Data are available by day, week, month and year. Since it is possible to
configure, for example, Google Scholar as a target whenever an article title is
present, skewed results may result. Be sure to consider how the SFX set up can
affect statistical output.
7. Number of clickthroughs per target. Query 7 ranks targets by frequency.
Results can be limited to the top 10, top 50 or top 100 (or all), and date ranges
are day, week, month and year. This is a nice report to run daily to see which
targets are getting the most clickthroughs. This report does not show “requests,”
only clickthroughs, so it is limited to a broader overview of actual use of each
target.
8. Number of clickthroughs per target service. This query ranks target
services by frequency. The same basic data as in Query 7, but Query 8 lists the
target AND the service type. For example, Query 7 may show 30 daily uses of
“Sage Complete.” While the same search in Query 8 will show the same uses as
“Sage Complete GetFullTxt,” which includes the service type.
9. Number of clickthroughs for one particular journal. Query 9 ranks a
specific full text journal’s use by target. You must know the ISSN for the journal in
question in order to run this query. The most interesting part of this query is that
the results are delineated by target, so when searching a title such as the Journal
of the American Chemical Society, UIUC library results show requests and
clickthroughs by four different targets for last year:
AMERICAN_CHEMICAL_SOCIETY_JOURNALS
AMERICAN_CHEMICAL_SOCIETY_LEGACY_ARCHIVE
LOCAL_CATALOGUE_ENDEAVOR_VOYAGER
REFWORKS_EXPORT_TOOL.
11
10. Most popular journals selected by target. This query ranks full text
journal use by a single target. You must select the single target in Query
Parameters. Results include the entire list of journals for a target from most- to
least-used for the time period specified in “Dates to Query.” This query is a great
way to keep up with use for journals within a package. For the American
Chemical Society (ACS) journals, it produces a ranked journal list so it is easy to
scan to the bottom to view those with the least use. Contents of targets can
change, so remember that they are not always comparable from year-to-year.
Additionally the ACS places older ACS journals in their “legacy archive” – a
separate target.
11. Most popular journals selected by source. Query 11 ranks full text
journals requested via the SFX button by source. The source must be selected
from the drop-down menu, such as “info:sid/CAS:CAPLUS” (SciFinder Scholar).
This is a great way to keep up on the most and least used journals in the key
index of a particular field.
12. Journals requested but have no full text. This query ranks requests for full
text journals which failed, or had no link to the full text. There are a number of
reasons why journals would show up as having no full text. If full text is limited to
certain years, the years outside the requested coverage will show up as “no full
text.” Also, book series or conference proceedings often show up in this query
because they are either not available in full text, or they are indexed as books
with ISBNs and do not have the correct linking to enter at the chapter or article
level. This query can also show the library where set-up problems exist in SFX,
so each title listed can become a research project to determine why linking is not
taking place. While time consuming, these are the titles your patrons are trying
to get, without success, and the time is well-spent to determine why these
requested journals are not accessible.
13. Selected document delivery targets by source. Query 13 ranks the use of
the getDocumentDelivery service by source. These data can help determine
which source is producing the most requests for interlibrary loan (by day, week,
12
month or year). The data are returned in alphabetical order by source, not by
highest use.
14. Books accessed via SFX ranked by use. Query 14 ranks book use (ISBNs)
by time period; output includes ISBN, number of requests, and clickthroughs. .
The main drawback with this query is that ISBNs are not the easiest way to
quickly identify a book or its subject. This search requires a separate look-up of
ISBNs in order to be useful.
15. Services preferred over full text. “If full text is available as a service in the
SFX Menu, and users choose another service, what kinds of services are they
choosing in favor of full text?” (ExLibris) In Query 15 the data are returned in
broad categories, showing for example how many users picked “getHolding” over
“getFullText” for a given time period.
This query provides an overview of the
alternatives to full text.
16. Unused full text journals. Query 16 ranks unused journals by time period,
often producing some very long lists. Annual totals of unused journals can be
extensive in large libraries. Package plans and bundling of journals can lead to
the library “turning on” quite a large number of peripheral journals. A better way
to determine low or no use is to use Query 11 (“Most popular journals selected
by source”) and study the bottom of that list, which is ranked by most- to leastused journals.
17. Number of requests which resulted in SFX menu screen without
services. This query often results in zeros. It shows, by time period (day, month
or year), the number of patron requests which did not elicit the appearance of a
link to click on in the SFX menu, or which did not generate a menu screen to
select an SFX service. The data are returned by date, and there is no
information given other than the number of “no services” replies from SFX for that
time period. This query might be good to show the progress of the library in
setting up SFX – the results should decrease as more sources and targets are
turned on, particularly after the ILL and “Report a Problem” targets and services
are activated. For example, for the first five months of 2008, the UIUC library had
only 4 requests that resulted in no SFX services – all in January.
13
18. Number of requests and clickthroughs by IP address. This query
provides a glimpse at use emanating from a particular IP. Data are returned by
IP, and then a second look up is necessary to determine the location of that IP
and what the data are indicating. This query is good for a broad determination of
the number of IPs making use of SFX for a given time period. Both Requests and
Clickthroughs are returned by IP, again allowing for an estimated “clickthrough
rate.” It is possible to request these data filtered by “netmask” – or the decimal
range of the IPs for your institution. While it might seem that this query could
offer a way to uncover unauthorized IP access, it is unlikely that spiders or other
tools to download large quantities of content would do so via SFX. Using SFX to
uncover these practices would be neither complete nor appropriate.
19. Most popular journals. Query 19 ranks the frequency of journal usage,
displaying both Requests and Clickthroughs. This is a quick way to check the
daily or monthly totals of the most-frequently requested journals. Annual totals
are cumbersome, but also represent a way to determine use. Keep in mind that
these use data only represent use from SFX-enabled links, so the data might be
incomplete.
20. Open URLs that resulted in no full text services, selected by source.
Query 20 is similar to Query 17, but with much more detail. This is the newest
and possibly the most powerful SFX query. A search on Query 20 limited to the
source “info:sid/CAS:CAPLUS” (SciFinder Scholar) and limited to “last week”
returned a list of 191 serials (with title, ISSN and publication date) by date which
could not be accessed in full text. In addition, a link is provided to the exact
openURL to completely replicate the “failed” search. This is a way to truly
troubleshoot specific links by source.
A Few Challenges
There are a number of known problems, more aptly described as
“challenges,” that exist in SFX that are worth noting. These challenges are
14
currently creating some minor problems, but with the release of newer SFX
versions, they may be corrected or addressed over time.
Source Terminology: The SFX statistical package, while simple in
structure and in the naming of the top 20 predetermined reports, is not without
need of a translator for the statistics relating to sources. For example, Query 2
returns results sorted by Source name. It takes awhile to learn this language.
“info:sid/CAS: CAPLUS” is in fact the source name for Chemical Abstracts
Service’s SciFinder Scholar; “info:sid/CAS:MEDLINE is the Medline subset
searching through SciFinder Scholar. Unless you are well versed in the
nomenclature of SFX, these headings are not intuitive. Further complications
arise when multiple subject-specific indexes are produced by one vendor. There
are numerous sources for EBSCO and CSA for example, necessitating that you
drill down through the subheadings and have a good idea of the names/terms
associated with the source you are examining. There is no known list of these
source names and their more common counterparts.
Unique or non-standardized characters: Instances of “nonstandardized volume information” can easily result in no link to full text.
Unfamiliar characters such as combined issues “1-2” or “1/2” in an openURL can
confuse the SFX resolver. In our experience, the link resolver will most often
work with the slash and the hyphen. However, spacing is critical. Extra spaces
between numbers and these characters may lead users to a title’s table of
contents rather than the full text article. This is a problem at the source level, but
once libraries are aware of how SFX resolves, the understanding increases,
leading to ways to fix problems and improve the resolving rate.
Issues in this
category are often resolved only at the SFX tech support level or by contacting
the source, the vendor that generated the OpenURL. Double or combined
volumes or issues of journals that normally only produce single volumes or
issues are often at fault, setting up the “non-standardized” information.
15
Resolving Percentage: As mentioned earlier, SFX often offers more
than one link to an article because of multiple vendors offering access. This can
keep the ratio between Requests and Clickthoughs artificially low, since users
will often just choose one option. But remember, other factors at the library and
source level can impact this number. Keep asking, “what is the problem with
those links that do not resolve? Are these fixable links?” SFX statistics can play a
critical role in highlighting requests that are not resolving.
Book Series Linking: SFX linking for book series will depend on how the
source (usually an A&I service such as SciFinder Scholar) sets up the indexing.
Is the link through the ISSN or by each individual book title (or ISBN)? Better
linking and indexing comes from the individual approach, cataloging at the most
detailed level possible (for book series, at the chapter level). Unfortunately,
libraries are not the decision-makers in this case. However, understanding how
each source indexes materials, such as book series, will provide a clearer
understanding of what SFX can and cannot be expected to link to, and at what
level. Another example of this problem is conference proceedings; depending on
how the publisher indexes the content, the SFX link may or may not link directly
to the specific article within the proceedings.
“Best” Queries for Collection Management
A list of the most useful queries for use in collection management is
completely subjective and will depend on what type of collection analysis is
needed. There are very good reasons to use each of the twenty SFX statistical
reports. Rogers-Urbanek believes that “Report 19 is obviously the most useful
for periodicals work,” answering the question, “What do your users SFX the
most?” Query 19 provides the full list of “most popular” journals, which can be
useful in smaller libraries, but might be overwhelming in large institutions.
However, a daily snapshot of the most popular journals in larger libraries might
be most useful, perhaps limited to only the top 50 or 100 titles. Larger collections
16
might be better analyzed by journal title within source or target (Queries 10 and
11). The point is, try all twenty. It is incredibly easy to run each search, using
the smallest time frame and parameters. A quick search will tell you if you like
the query enough to conduct a more in-depth search, expanding the parameters.
Experimenting and learning more about each query is the best way to make good
use of this incredibly deep statistical resource.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library recently made use
of two reports to answer or clarify specific collection questions. Query 12 and
Query 19 were used to help determine which electronic journals (current and
backfiles) were most needed/requested by our patrons and for which we were
not providing access. Both reports were run at the end of the year for calendar
year 2007. The returned data were transferred to Excel spreadsheets and
additional columns were added to gather more information.
In the Query 12 report (Journals Requested But Have No Full text),
columns were added for UIUC’s known electronic coverage, if a backfile or
electronic access was available, publisher name and price of the product
available, and recommended action. A graduate student searched for the data to
populate these new columns. The results were shared across the library since
many subject specialties were affected. This spreadsheet was designed to show
subject selectors, at a glance, how many unsuccessful requests were made for a
specific journal, if electronic access is available, and at what cost.
Recommendations included things such as “get price quote” where none was
available online, “purchase” when costs were low and attempted use was high,
and “check SFX for linking” when the library did have access but there was no
linking, possibly due to this title not being activated in SFX. This was a very
valuable exercise. In some cases we could provide the requested coverage, and
indeed were already paying for it, by simply adding the link to SFX. In addition,
some purchases were very reasonable and resulted in higher use and satisfied
17
customers with a small investment. In all cases this process showed us where
our users wanted access, but were denied access.
Query 19 (Most Popular Journals) was requested and limited to the top
100 journals via SFX for calendar year 2007 at the UIUC library. A column was
added for current online coverage of each of the 100 titles. Those data were
searched and filled in by a graduate assistant. Together these 100 titles
accounted for over 93,000 requests and nearly 77,000 clickthroughs, a
considerable amount of annual usage. The results compared use (SFX data) with
available electronic journal coverage, allowing us to determine if our top 100 titles
were resolving well or if there were problems.
For example, the second title on
the list, The Wall Street Journal, had 4204 requests and 4120 clickthroughs, with
online coverage back to 1889. Clearly, this title is functioning well. However, the
ninth title, Journal of the American Medical Association, had 1303 requests and
1025 clickthroughs, with online coverage beginning only in 1990. This may
indicate the need for further coverage, possibly the purchase of a backfile. Users
may be trying to access older issues (before our 1990+ coverage begins),
resulting in fewer clickthroughs. The entire list of the top 100 titles was reviewed,
and again recommendations were made to subject selectors concerning
improvements in coverage.
The recent addition of the Advanced Collection Tool to SFX makes it
possible to mechanize the addition of dates of coverage to information retrieved
from the established queries, eliminating the need to perform this tedious work by
hand. More information about this new feature is found in “The Next Step”
section.
For subject-specific collection librarians, Query 11, “Most popular journals
selected by source,” can be very helpful. For example, limiting Query 11 to the
source Scifinder Scholar returns a ranked list of the most used journals (requests
and clickthroughs) linked from that source.
18
Since all titles with as few as one
request will be returned, the bottom of this list can be as interesting as the top.
Viewing the highest- and lowest-used journals from the most important index in
your field can quickly point to the strengths and weaknesses in the collection.
The Next Step
After familiarizing yourself with the SFX statistics module, the natural
progression for collection development librarians is to begin experimenting with
the Advanced Collection Tool. Released by Ex Libris in October 2008, the
Advanced Collection Tool allows collection specialists to begin to remedy gaps
exposed by the statistical queries by using a series of pre-programmed scripts.
The first script makes it possible to compare publisher package title and date
coverage information, regardless of whether or not a library already subscribes to
the content. This is particularly useful when reviewing new subscription options.
A second script highlights overlapping title and date coverage within the set of
titles that are currently active in SFX. This powerful tool identifies unique titles
and duplicates in existing collections. Finally, the third script makes it possible to
generate a report by uploading a list of ISSN’s. This report indicates whether
items in the list are already part of the library’s holdings and dates of access. If
not already part of the library’s holdings, the report indicates targets (packages)
where the item is available and dates of access. Those experimenting with
Queries 12 and 19 will be particularly excited to know that the third script is able
to interpret the ISSN information in Column A of the query output reports.
Formatted as “ISSN title” or “####-#### Journal Title,” experimentation has
shown that this list is still processed as a viable source of ISSNs. By uploading
the data from these queries, it is now possible to obtain information about dates
of coverage for popular titles and/or titles with no full-text available without the
tedious efforts described in the section “Best” Queries for Collection
Management. As with script one, information about years of access is available
for both subscribed and unsubscribed content. Script three is the ultimate
collection tool, enabling librarians to harness data in the SFX KnowledgeBase
19
when reviewing a typical title lists and information drawn from the statistics
module.
Conclusions
Individual libraries are responsible for making SFX work, but the power
and potential of this tool are enormous. Experimenting with the established
queries is a worthwhile investment. SFX statistics provide a way to monitor the
SFX implementation, pinpointing problems and spotlighting areas that need
attention. SFX statistics allow libraries to determine what’s working well and
what’s not working at all. It is a critical resource that should not be overlooked.
References
Cochenour, Donnice, Jaramillo, George R. and Michele Wilde (2004) Access to
E-Resources: The Implementation of SFX. Technical Services Quarterly 21: 3,
pp. 25-39.
Cummings, Joel and Ryan Johnson (2003): The use and usability of SFX:
context-sensitive reference linking. Library Hi-Tech 21, pp. 70-84.
Curran, M. (2006) Organize, Simplify and Realize: Using the SFX Monthly
Update Reports to Manage New and Dropped Titles (or Nearly!) in a Matter of
Minutes. The Serials Librarian 51:1, pp. 27-36.
ExLibris, “SFX 3.0 User Guide Part 2,” 5 May 2008, Document Version 1.7, 182
pp.
Gallagher, John, Bauer, Kathleen and Daniel M. Dollar (2005) Evidence-based
librarianship: Utilizing data from al available sources to make judicious print
cancellation decisions. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services
29:2, pp. 169-179.
Holman, Jenifer (2005) Can SFX replace your homegrown periodicals holding
list?: How the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse made the transition. Serials
Librarian 47:4, pp. 79-88.
Robertson, Wendy C. and Paul A. Soderdahl (2004) Everything You Always
Wanted to Know About SFX but Were Afraid to Ask. The Serials Librarian 47:1/2,
pp. 129-38.
20
Rogers-Urbanek, Jenica P. “Using SFX reports to make collection development
decisions: do you know what your online users are doing? Did you know
that SFX can tell you?” 9 October 2006. State University of New York at
Potsdam. 2 February 2007. http://www2.potsdam.edu/rogersjp/SUNYAUG06
SFX website, http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/sfx.htm 30 Nov. 30 2007.
Stengel, Mark (2004) Using SFX to identify unexpressed user needs. Collection
Management 29:2, pp. 7-14.
Twiss-Brooks, Andrea (2003) Linking to full text (and beyond) with SFX. GSIS
Proceedings, pp. 87-93.
Wakimoto, Jina Choi Walker David S. and Katherine S. Dabbour (2006) The
myths and realities of SFX in academic libraries. Journal of Academic
Librarianship 32, pp. 127-136.
21