Insights and opinions of readers of the Journal of the Medical Library Association

The conducted a readership survey in 2020 to gain a deeper understanding of our readers, their reading habits, and their satisfaction with 's content, website functionality, and overall quality. A total of 467 readers responded to the survey, most of whom were librarians/information specialists...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the Medical Library Association 2022-04, Vol.110 (2), p.156-158
Main Authors: Akers, Katherine G, Pionke, J J, Aaronson, Ellen, Koenig, Rachel, Kraft, Michelle, Murphy, Beverly
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Academic libraries
Collection development
Collection management
Communication channels
Editorials
Health sciences
Humans
Information professionals
Librarians
Libraries, Medical
Library Associations
Library Science
Library staff
Medical libraries
Polls & surveys
Publishing
Readers
Reading
Reproducibility
Scholarly publishing
Social networks
Social research
Technical services
Web sites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The conducted a readership survey in 2020 to gain a deeper understanding of our readers, their reading habits, and their satisfaction with 's content, website functionality, and overall quality. A total of 467 readers responded to the survey, most of whom were librarians/information specialists (85%), worked in an academic (62%) or hospital/health care system (27%) library, and were current Medical Library Association members (80%). Most survey respondents (46%) reported reading articles on a quarterly basis. Over half of respondents (53%) said they used social media to follow new research or publications, with Twitter being the most popular platform. Respondents stated that Original Investigations, Case Reports, Knowledge Syntheses, and Resource Reviews articles were the most enjoyable to read and important to their research and practice. Almost all respondents reported being satisfied or very satisfied (94%) with the website. Some respondents felt that the content of leaned more toward academic librarianship than toward clinical/hospital librarianship and that there were not enough articles on collection management or technical services. These opinions and insights of our readers help keep the editorial team on track toward publishing articles that are of interest and utility to our audience, raising reader awareness of new content, providing a website that is easy to navigate and use, and maintaining our status as the premier journal in health sciences librarianship.
ISSN:1536-5050
1558-9439
DOI:10.5195/jmla.2022.1458