Skip all navigation and go to page content
NN/LM Home About PNR | Contact PNR | Feedback |Site Map | Help | Bookmark and Share

Archive for March, 2006

PNR EFTS Update

Thursday, March 23rd, 2006

EFTS

As of March 17, 26% of Pacific Northwest DOCLINE libraries participate in EFTS, DOCLINE’s electronic billing component. (more…)

What’s Your Story? Find it at Montana Libraries

Monday, March 20th, 2006

The Montana State Library is conducting a multi-year campaign: “What’s Your Story? Find it at the Library.” Montana’s rapidly growing senior citizen population is the target market for 2006, and NN/LM PNR Montana Network Members are invited to get involved. (more…)

Happy 21st Birthday DOCLINE

Wednesday, March 15th, 2006

A message from the National Library of Medicine:

Tugger in a birthday hat The National Library of Medicine and the DOCLINE Team proudly acknowledge that today marks 21 years of service to the health library community for DOCLINE.

DOCLINE was initially implemented in March 1985 as a command line, character based system for placing and routing interlibrary loan requests among the National Network of Libraries of Medicine. In fiscal year 1987, borrowers entered 788,105 interlibrary loan requests into DOCLINE and there were 1,435 participating libraries.

Today, DOCLINE serves more than 3,200 libraries in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. DOCLINE libraries currently report more than 1.4 million serial holdings. DOCLINE also provides select international medical libraries the ability to serve users in their regions via Loansome Doc. (more…)

Kenai Community Library wins NCLIS Award

Friday, March 10th, 2006

Kenai Community Library is the state of Alaska winner for the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS) 2006 Health Awards competition, Librarian Julie Niederhause recently learned.

The NCLIS Health Information Task Force is busily evaluating all the state winners’ entries in order to narrow the winners to ten finalists, whose representatives will be invited to participate in the health information forum co-sponsored by the National Library of Medicine and NCLIS on May 4, 2006 at the Lister Hill Auditorium on the NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland.

Nine of these finalists will be honored with a commemorative plaque and $1,000 and the Grand Prize winner will receive a plaque and $20,000 at the reception following the forum.

NCLIS will issue a formal press release regarding the state winners very shortly. In the meantime, congratulations, Julie!

Update on the NIH Public Access Policy

Thursday, March 9th, 2006

* On November 15, 2005, the Public Access Working Group (PAWG), appointed by the agency to advise it on implementing and improving the policy, recommended that the request for public access be upgraded to a requirement and that the permissible delay be shortened from 12 months to 6 months. PAWG was responding to NIH data showing that fewer than 5% of NIH grantees were complying with the request for public access.

* In early February 2006, the NIH sent a progress report to Congress (dated January 2006). Among other things it reported that the rate of compliance with its request for public-access was below 4%, that handling existing submissions under the policy cost the agency $1 million/year, and that handling submissions under a 100% compliance rate would cost the agency $3.5 million/year.

See: The NIH progress report to Congress, January 2006

Also: Dorothea Salo, Spaghetti that didn’t stick, Caveat Lector, February 16, 2006. A blog posting on the NIH progress report to Congress, focusing on the low compliance rate.

* On February 8, 2006, the NLM Board of Regents endorsed the November 2005 PAWG recommendations in a letter to NIH Director Elias Zerhouni (scroll down to first posting on Thursday February 16).

From Peter Suber:

What’s important here is the momentum. Congress asked for a strong policy and NIH delivered a weak one. As evidence mounted that the NIH policy was not meeting its goals, one authoritative body after another asked NIH to strengthen the policy and live up to the original request from Congress. First the Public Access Working Group recommended a stronger policy. Then the NIH acknowledged the miserable compliance rate in a report to Congress. Then the NLM Board of Regents recommended a stronger policy. If the NIH is waiting for Congress to weigh in, then it’s forgetting that Congress has already weighed in. Moreover, Congress is now considering Joe Lieberman’s CURES bill, which would give the NIH an OA mandate, shorten the access embargo to six months, and extend this strong policy to other funding agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services.

*The above is excerpted from the 3/2/2006 SPARC Open Access Newsletter.

*The latest from the Washington Post, 3/10/06: Government Health Research Pressed to Share Data at No Charge, Rick Weiss