Schmidt C M, Eckerman N L
Muncie Center for Medical Education, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana 47306, USA.
Bull Med Libr Assoc. 2001 Apr;89(2):165-9.
Academic medical librarians responsible for monograph acquisition face a challenging task. From the plethora of medical monographs published each year, academic medical librarians must select those most useful to their patrons. Unfortunately, none of the selection tools available to medical librarians are specifically intended to assist academic librarians with medical monograph selection. The few short core collection lists that are available are intended for use in the small hospital or internal medicine department library. As these are the only selection tools available, however, many academic medical librarians spend considerable time reviewing these collection lists and place heavy emphasis on the acquisition of listed books. The study reported here was initiated to determine whether the circulation of listed books in an academic library justified the emphasis placed on the acquisition of these books. Circulation statistics for "listed" and "nonlisted" books in the hematology (WH) section of Indiana University School of Medicine's Ruth Lilly Medical Library were studied. The average circulation figures for listed books were nearly two times as high as the corresponding figures for the WH books in general. These data support the policies of those academic medical libraries that place a high priority on collection of listed books.
负责专著采购的学术医学图书馆员面临一项具有挑战性的任务。每年出版的医学专著数量众多，学术医学图书馆员必须从中挑选出对读者最有用的那些。不幸的是，医学图书馆员可用的选择工具都并非专门用于协助学术图书馆员进行医学专著的挑选。现有的少数简短的核心藏书清单是供小型医院或内科部门图书馆使用的。然而，由于这些是仅有的选择工具，许多学术医学图书馆员花费大量时间查阅这些藏书清单，并非常重视采购清单上列出的书籍。此处报告的这项研究旨在确定一所学术图书馆中清单上列出的书籍的流通情况是否证明了对这些书籍采购的重视是合理的。研究了印第安纳大学医学院露丝·莉莉医学图书馆血液学（WH）部门“清单上列出的”和“未列出的”书籍的流通统计数据。清单上列出的书籍的平均流通量几乎是该WH部门一般书籍相应流通量的两倍。这些数据支持了那些高度重视采购清单上列出的书籍的学术医学图书馆的政策。
