评估美国国立卫生研究院图书馆编辑服务：用于分析服务影响的试点研究。

Science and Technology Libraries Pub Date : 2014-12-01 DOI:10.1080/0194262X.2014.950000

Cindy Clark, Brigit Sullivan

{"title":"评估美国国立卫生研究院图书馆编辑服务：用于分析服务影响的试点研究。","authors":"Cindy Clark, Brigit Sullivan","doi":"10.1080/0194262X.2014.950000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evidence-based librarianship drives initiatives and priorities in today's research centers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Library's Editing Service, librarians conducted a pilot study comparing edited manuscripts with the published versions. Using a random number generator, five published journal articles were chosen for evaluation from a pool of NIH manuscripts (n=147) edited between January 2008 and February 2012. A rubric delineating categories of frequently-checked writing elements was used to facilitate quantitative analysis. Findings showed that 84% of editors' suggestions were accepted for three of the published papers that were submitted to the originally intended journal.","PeriodicalId":39556,"journal":{"name":"Science and Technology Libraries","volume":"33 4","pages":"351-357"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4267300/pdf/nihms629626.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the NIH Library Editing Service: Pilot Study Used to Analyze Service Impact.\",\"authors\":\"Cindy Clark, Brigit Sullivan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0194262X.2014.950000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evidence-based librarianship drives initiatives and priorities in today's research centers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Library's Editing Service, librarians conducted a pilot study comparing edited manuscripts with the published versions. Using a random number generator, five published journal articles were chosen for evaluation from a pool of NIH manuscripts (n=147) edited between January 2008 and February 2012. A rubric delineating categories of frequently-checked writing elements was used to facilitate quantitative analysis. Findings showed that 84% of editors' suggestions were accepted for three of the published papers that were submitted to the originally intended journal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Technology Libraries\",\"volume\":\"33 4\",\"pages\":\"351-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4267300/pdf/nihms629626.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Technology Libraries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2014.950000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Technology Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2014.950000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

以证据为基础的图书馆事业推动了当今研究中心的倡议和优先事项。为了评估美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）图书馆编辑服务的有效性，图书馆员进行了一项试点研究，将编辑过的手稿与出版过的版本进行比较。使用随机数生成器，从2008年1月至2012年2月编辑的NIH手稿池（n=147）中选择5篇已发表的期刊文章进行评估。一个描述经常检查的写作元素类别的标题被用来促进定量分析。研究结果显示，在提交给原计划期刊的已发表论文中，有三篇有84%的编辑建议被接受。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Evaluating the NIH Library Editing Service: Pilot Study Used to Analyze Service Impact.

查看原文本刊更多论文

Evaluating the NIH Library Editing Service: Pilot Study Used to Analyze Service Impact.

Evidence-based librarianship drives initiatives and priorities in today's research centers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Library's Editing Service, librarians conducted a pilot study comparing edited manuscripts with the published versions. Using a random number generator, five published journal articles were chosen for evaluation from a pool of NIH manuscripts (n=147) edited between January 2008 and February 2012. A rubric delineating categories of frequently-checked writing elements was used to facilitate quantitative analysis. Findings showed that 84% of editors' suggestions were accepted for three of the published papers that were submitted to the originally intended journal.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Science and Technology Libraries Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences

CiteScore

3.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Science & Technology Libraries is the only peer-reviewed scholarly journal that provides you with the information and insight you need to build a stronger collection, offer better services, and stay a step ahead of the latest developments in sci-tech librarianship. Whether you"re a publisher, processor, or provider of scientific information, this quarterly journal will help you address everyday issues by providing up-to-date analysis and commentary from the leading experts in instruction and other sci-tech library information services. The journal features articles, columns, and research findings that update you on the latest print and electronic resources for service and practice.