An integral pulse frequency modulated gas microbubble detector is described. When used in conjunction with an electromagnetic blood flowmeter, the ultrasound pulse repetition frequency can be regulated to reduce multiple counting errors due to variations in blood flow rate. A special detector mounting head eliminates problems due to wall curvature and pulsation, permits reliable and reproducible transducer coupling and makes it possible to gate the ultrasound field electronically in order to avoid spurious counts due to crystal and wall artefacts and low intensity regions.Results obtained from the detector during an in vifro evaluation of bubble oxygenators suggest that the number of arterial line gas microbubbles is less than has been claimed previously and that the total volume of gas liberated in the form of microbubbles may be too small to have any demonstrable priman/ clinical effects.
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL)/Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) Joint Task Force on Research Data Services formed in 2020 with a two-fold purpose: (1) to demonstrate and commit to the roles research libraries have in stewarding research data and as part of institution-wide research support services and (2) to guide the development of resources for the ARL and CARL memberships in advancing their organizations as collaborative partners with respect to research data services in the context of FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) data principles and the US National Academies’ Open Science by Design framework. Research libraries will be successful in meeting these objectives if they act collectively and are deeply engaged with disciplinary communities. The task force formed three working groups of data practitioners, representing a wealth of expertise, to research the institutional landscape and policy environment in both the US and Canada. This report presents the task force’s recommendations for the roles of research libraries with regard to research data principles, policies, and approaches to managing research data. The report also offers strategies for discipline-specific research data approaches, priorities for automation of processes, economic models to scale and sustain shared resources, prioritization of research data to steward, and decision-making rubrics.
The scholarly community's current definition of "open" captures only some of the attributes of openness that exist across different publishing models and content types. Open is not an end in itself, but a means for achieving the most effective dissemination of scholarship and research. We suggest that the different attributes of open exist along a broad spectrum and propose an alternative way of describing and evaluating openness based on four attributes: discoverable, accessible, reusable, and transparent. These four attributes of openness, taken together, form the draft "DART Framework for Open Access." This framework can be applied to both research artifacts as well as research processes. We welcome input from the broader scholarly community about this framework. OSI2016 workgroup question
A review of Druin, Allison. “What Children Can Teach Us: Developing Digital Libraries for Children with Children.” The Library Quarterly 75.1 (January 2005): 20-41. Objective – Through use of an interdisciplinary research team that included children, the study aimed to demonstrate that including children in the design of a digital library for children would result in some new approaches that would improve the site’s usability for the target user group. Design – Case study. Setting – The research was conducted at University of Maryland over a four-year period and involved an interdisciplinary research team of adult researchers from information studies, computer science, education, art, and psychology as well as seven children aged 7-11. Subjects – Seven children participated in the design team over two years; 153 children were observed and interviewed in the design phase; and the resulting new approaches were validated post-launch by analysis of International Children’s Digital Library (ICDL) (http://www.icdlbooks.org) users and usage patterns from November 2002-November 2003 (over 90,000 unique users and 19,000 optional questionnaire respondents). Method – The study included seven children in the design team for a digital library of international children’s books, which resulted in new approaches to collection development, cataloguing, and the search interface. In the design phase, research methods involving the seven children included brainstorming techniques, “cooperative inquiry”, low-tech prototyping; and lab use studies. The team also undertook observation and interviews of 153 children engaged in searching and selecting books from public library catalogues. In validating the new approaches that resulted from the design research, the team employed web log analysis, a voluntary online survey, and working with children in local schools to understand their use of ICDL. Main results – The inclusion of children’s viewpoints in the design stage of the ICDL had an impact in three areas: collection development, metadata, and interface design. For collection development, the research showed that kids were interested in books about children from other cultures and other times in history; in animals, both real and make-believe; in books that are sensitive to other cultures; and in books that are in good condition. For metadata, the research showed that children do not distinguish ‘fiction’ and ‘non-fiction’; look for ‘scary stuff’ or ‘gross stuff’; are often seeking books that make them feel a certain way; care about the look of book covers and may recall books by jacket colours; and use free vocabulary like ‘princesses’ and ‘jokes’. For interface design, the children’s involvement led to more search options (utilizing the new categories of metadata that were created), and customization options such as ability to choose different forms and colour palettes for book readers (e.g. the comic book reader, the spiral book reader). Web log and survey data, as well as lab tests, showed that the innovations resulting from the children’s design input were used. Of the over 90,000 unique users who visited the site in its first year, “genre” and “color” were statistically the fourth and fifth most popular search categories. In lab tests, girls used “color” twice as often as boys, and older boys preferred “genre” while younger children did not pay attention to that category. Conclusions – A first conclusion is that children’s input is vital to creating an online library that meets children’s information needs, tendencies and preferences. Also, seven design principles emerged: 1. Children’s input is invaluable and they should be involved in the design of their libraries. 2. Digital collections for children should consider works both contemporary and historical, and in different languages and representative of different cultures. 3. A variety of search interfaces are needed and it is particularly important to express categories with visual icons. 4. Additional metadata can be needed to reflect children’s views of relevant search criteria. 5. Interfaces should be customizable, such as providing various formats of reader that could themselves be customized in colour. 6. Tools should be suitable for use from the home and for collaborative use, such as use by a parent with a child. 7. Innovation requiring high bandwidth must be balanced with a low bandwidth version to assure broadest possible use. Lastly, the researchers concluded that more research is merited to assess the broader impact of digital libraries on children as searchers and readers.
A review of: George, Carole A. “Testing the Barriers to Digital Libraries: A Study Seeking Copyright Permission to Digitize Published Works.” New Library World 106.1214/1215 (2005): 332-42. Objective – To assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the copyright permission-seeking process and to suggest improvements in order to improve outcomes. Design – Workflow study. Setting – Carnegie Mellon University Libraries, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Sample – A random sample of titles published 1999-2001 was selected from the library’s circulating collection. After eliminating duplicates, technical reports, theses, dissertations, and missing items, the sample comprised 337 titles. Of these titles, 70% were books, and 56% were from commercial publishers. From this a working sample of 273 titles was derived, comprising those titles protected by copyright and with the rights owner clearly indicated. About 73% of this working sample appeared to be out-of-print; their median publication year was 1981. Method – In this two year study (1999-2001), a random sample of books was selected, and pertinent bibliographic and copyright holder information researched and recorded. Permission letters were sent and, six weeks later, follow-up letters were sent to non-respondents. The letter allowed respondents four options: Grant full permission to digitize the work and provide unrestricted Web access; Grant permission to digitize the work and provide read-only Web access, limited to Carnegie Mellon University users; Declare that they do not hold the rights, and hopefully provide information to identify and locate the actual rights holder; Deny permission for digitization. Results were then recorded and analyzed. Main results – Of the 273 letters mailed, a clear ‘yes’ or ‘no’ reply was obtained for just over half (52%) of the documents. Sixteen percent of the rights holders could not be found (the letter was returned, or a referral proved impossible to locate and contact). Another 25% of the copyright holders simply did not reply, and 7% were otherwise problematic. Of the 143 ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses, 54% denied permission, while 46% granted permission. (Note: these percentage figures appear to be erroneously reversed in Table 1 of George’s article.) Therefore, of the overall working sample of 273 titles, permission to digitize was obtained for only 24% of the titles. A substantial portion of the permissions (41 of 66, or 62%) carried some restriction. This represents 15% of the total working sample. Only a few restriction requests were deemed too great to make use of the permission. Commercial publishers who made up 58% of the working sample granted permission at the lowest rate (13%). Response time averaged three months from the time the initial letter was sent until a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response was received. Negative responses averaged a bit longer than positive responses (101 days to 124 days). However, some of this time was attributable to delays in issuing follow-up or redirected request letters (a step required in 60% of cases), owing to the limited staff resources at Carnegie Mellon. The copyright ownership had changed in 23% of the sample, requiring more than one and up to three different addresses to be contacted before a response was received or the effort was terminated. Conclusions – The study concluded that the permission rate would remain low unless additional efforts were made in the permission-seeking process (e.g., personal contacts in addition to letters and emails), or unless more selective approaches were employed (e.g., targeting non-commercial publishers). It also concluded that the process to seek copyright permissions was neither quick nor easy, suggesting the need for dedicated staff time and a readily accessible database of publisher contact information. As a result, subsequent projects have improved their permission-seeking process, focusing on more non-commercial publishers or older publication dates, and asking publishers for blanket consent for all of their out-of-print titles.
Objective -To explore how Web-savvy users think about and search an online catalogue.Design -Protocol analysis study. Setting -Academic library (Pennsylvania State University Libraries).Subjects -Eighteen users (17 students, 1 faculty member) of an online public access catalog, divided into two groups of nine first-time and nine experienced users.Method -The study team developed five tasks that represented a range of activities commonly performed by library users, such as searching for a specific item, identifying a library location, and requesting a copy. Seventeen students and one faculty member, divided evenly between novice and experienced searchers, were recruited to "think aloud" through the performance of the tasks. Data were gathered through audio recordings, screen capture software, and investigator notes. The time taken for each task was recorded, and investigators rated task completion as "successful," "partially successful," "fail," or "search aborted." After the searching session, participants were interviewed to clarify their actions and provide further commentary on the catalogue search.Main results -Participants in both test groups were relatively unsophisticated subject searchers. They made minimal use of Boolean operators, and tended not to repair failed searches by rethinking the search vocabulary and using synonyms. Participants did not have a strong understanding of library catalogue contents
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.