U of Utah and ReadCube at Charleston 2013

readcube

An Alternative Mechanism for the Delivery of Scholarly Journal Articles

ReadCube Access at the University of Utah

Phill Jones, PhDHead of External Partnerships

Mark EnglandCollection Development

Librarian

Background – The University of Utah and the Marriott Library

• Marriott Library serves a major research institution– 31,000 Students, 2,000 Faculty– 72 Undergraduate Majors and 90 fields of graduate study

• Serials expenses of $2.2 million

• With growth and inflation serials increased 14% over last two fiscal years even though 247 titles were cancelled.

Background – University of Utah Exploring Options

• Traditional collection management through journal subscriptions is unsustainable

• Unmediated, demand-driven article purchases are an option that needs further exploration

• ReadCube Access offers a means for the immediate provision of articles at a cost lower than ILL, document delivery or pay per view

ReadCube and ReadCube Access

• ReadCube: a content delivery platform for academic journals that was launched in 2011

• Two main channels

– A reference manager client with built in discovery tools and single click article download

– A service-based web reader that is integrated into publisher websites

• ReadCube Access: a patron-driven article acquisition system assembled within the ReadCube platform

– Currently available for all content in the 100+ journals available on nature.com

The Serials Crisis

• Scholarly output doubles every 20 years

• This is in-line with:1. Research output2. Number of papers

published

• BUT….• The rate of cost increase is 5-

9% and would outstrip library budgets, even if they weren’t falling.

• Irrespective of value, subscriptions are increasingly unsustainable. 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%Serial Expenditures in ARL Libraries

(n=107)Serial (Unit cost)Serial Expen-ditureLinear (Serial Expenditure)

Change s

ince 1

986

ReadCube Survey – Pay Wall Coping

User’s hit a pay wall an estimated 3.1 times a month

8.9% hit a pay wall more than 10 times/month – WOW!

Results consistent with Access to Scholarly Content: Gaps and Barriers (2011). Retrieved from http://www.rin.ac.uk/node/1172

I bought the PDF

I requested it from my institutional library

I requested a copy from author

I got it from a friend

I found it online for free

I looked for another article with similar information that was accessible/free

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Didn't uselibrary services

59%

Used library

services

41%

Do Patrons go to the library to find articles?

Access to Scholarly Content Gaps and Barriers

Access gaps result in the disintermediation of the academic library.

When researchers at universities were faced with a pay wall:

• They requested an interlibrary loan 20.6% of the time

• They obtain the article from a colleague 17.5% of the time

• They look for a version on the web 19% of the time

Access to Scholarly Content: Gaps and Barriers (2011). Retrieved from http://www.rin.ac.uk/node/1172

Disintermediation Of Library Services

• ARL has measured a fall in ILL use– http://www.arl.org/focus-a

reas/statistics-assessment/statistical-trends

• With libraries beginning to unsubscribe from big deals, shouldn’t it be rising?

• Patrons are going outside of the library to find content

1995 2000 2005 20100%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

en

tage i

ncre

ase

ove

r 1995 v

alu

e

Where Are Patrons Finding Articles?

One single unnamed website responsible for $1.4m in illicit file sharing during 2008Int J Med Informatics, 5, 1 (2009)

Interlibrary loan

Twitter#icanhazpd

f

OA repositories

Authorwebsite/email

Bulletin Boards/ Forums*

Google Scholar

Email a friend

With access

Removing Barriers to AccessPurchasing articles through ReadCube Access

was intended to be easier than file sharing

• Instantaneous delivery

• ‘Free’ to the end-user

• Library creates pre-paid fund

• Designed by researchers to fit into the researcher workflow

BUT…

• It required Patrons to install a client application

Calculating the Best Value Option

• Effective cost per use depends on number of uses for both subscription and ILL

• ILL is expensive if usage is high enough for copyright fees (>5 / year)

• Subscription is not cost effective unless hundreds of uses

• A cost-effective option is needed between the two

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000

10

20

30

40

50

PDA ($9.99) Inter Library LoanPay Per View Subscription Cost Per Use

Number of Uses/ Year

Co

st

Pe

r U

se

($

)

Best value from PDA

Trial at The University of Utah

• Would a PDA model result in unsustainable use?

• Would PDA model be accepted as an alternative to subscription?

• Would patrons accept digital rights management?

• Would the cost of ReadCube Access compare favorably with other means of obtaining content?

• How would use of ReadCube Access compare with interlibrary loan use?

Parameters

• University of Utah subscribes to 79 of the 108 journals on Nature.com

• Promotion was limited to approximately 1,320 faculty, post-doctoral fellows and graduate students in science and engineering but excluding medicine

• Trial was originally set to run for a semester but ran for a year

Results• Of 1,320 possible users 102 registered to use

ReadCube Access

• ReadCube Access is more cost effective than ILL or a subscription for low-use journals, for example:

TitleSubscripti

on CostReadCube

UsesReadCube

CostsILL Uses

ILL Costs (estimated)

Nature Climate Change $4,985 12 $96 3 $21

Nature Communications $3,525 25 $195 27 $900

ResultsReadCube Access use correlates well with ILL use

Title Online ISSN

ReadCube Downloads Sept 2012

- June 2013

(Approved Users)

ILL Requests Submitted Sept 2012 - June 2013

(Entire Campus)

Cell Death and Differentiation 1476-5403 0 1Cell Research 1748-7838 0 0European Journal of Human Genetics 1476-5438 0 1Heredity 1365-2540 0 0Journal of Human Genetics 1435-232X 0 0Nature Climate Change 1758-6798 12 3Nature Communications 2041-1723 25 27Nature Digest 1880-0556 0 0Nature Methods 1548-7105 0 1Nature News 1744-7933 0 1Nature Photonics 1749-4893 0 1

Lessons and User Feedback The Positives

1. Users appreciate the immediacy of ReadCube Access

2. Library achieved significant cost savings while meeting the needs of many users

3. Unmediated, patron-driven solution saves everyone time and money

4. Fears of program abuse were not borne out

Lessons and User Feedback The Negatives

1. DRM had a mixed reception - Some requests for more access rights

2. Requirement for a Web-based solution AND a client application

3. Requests for a greater range of content

4. Requests for better discovery, including more abstract databases

ReadCube Access Version 2.0

• Trial feedback used in development

• Relies on IP authentication

• Allows users to access content directly from the publisher’s website

• Uses cloud technology to automatically synchronize content across applications

• Article printing is now available in the purchase tier

• Adds a third, unrestricted PDF purchase option

ReadCube Access on the Web

• ReadCube Access panel replaces PPV options on publisher website

• SaaS PDF reader syncs with desktop app

Informed Collection Management

Purchases history at a glance

Tools to monitor users and avoid overuse

Analyze how much is spent on each title

New Pricing Tiers• Feature/pricing tiers modified due to

feedback

– Rental is unchanged

– Cloud articles are now printable

– New ‘full value’ PDF can be opened in other PDF readers

• Slightly revised pricing structure

– Developed with input from NPG

Trial Conclusion

‘ReadCube Access represents good value for money and a sustainable model’

-Rick Anderson, Associate Dean, Marriot Library

Long Term Vision• A cross-publisher PDA platform for journal articles• Fully automated system reduces costs and complexity• A single interface with unified login credentials

– PDA as well as instant PPV

ArticlesArticles

Licensepurchase

Licensepurchase

Summary• ReadCube’s objective is to improve access to scholarly

literature for scientists, in collaboration with libraries and publishers

• Efficient and cost-effective demand-driven acquisition is one part of a multi-access environment including subscriptions, ILL, big deals and open access

• It is important to reverse the trend of library disintermediation and devaluation - PDA will help

• Initial trials of ReadCube Access show it to be efficient, sustainable, and a good value

• ReadCube Access is continuing to develop to meet library and scholar needs

Contact Details

Phill Jones, PhDHead of External Partnerships, ReadCube

[email protected]: @phillbjones

Mark England, MLSCollection Development LibrarianMarriot Library, University of Utah

[email protected]