Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The ten chapters of this multiauthored work are grouped into four parts: “Chat Reference,” “Training and Staffing,” “Evaluation,” and “Innovative Approaches.” Brief biographical sketches are given for the seventeen authors and four editors. Contributors come from the United States, Canada, and Denmark and different types of libraries and library schools, though none is from a medical library. The book consists of the “best” papers from a conference on virtual reference. “Chat Reference” deals with teenagers and impatient and rude encounters, providing verbatim transcripts and offering sound advice. Some teen questions are amusing and amazing, and some of the rude encounters would test any librarian's patience. These two chapters are instructive for anyone dealing with the public in a virtual environment. The advice on avoiding unpleasant or difficult interactions applies to almost any reference context. The chapters on “Training and Staffing” describe a workshop at the University of Maryland and a survey of staffing issues at Canadian universities. The advice, once more, is presented with practical suggestions. Sufficient detail is given about the workshop and feedback from it that one could use the chapter in setting up a similar course. Most of the sixteen Canadian libraries did not hire additional staff to provide virtual reference, and the chapter discusses the “sacrifice” entailed. “Evaluation” has a chapter on setting performance targets and another on creating a knowledgebase of digital reference transactions. In one chapter, the Vancouver Public Library pondered measuring success and set performance targets. The project in the second chapter involved a complex survey and analysis for developing a “schema” that would pull together material from disparate sources into a “Digital Reference Electronic Warehouse.” A Danish consortium of public and academic libraries supported by the Danish National Library Authority is profiled in the first chapter of “Innovative Approaches.” A “veteran” (about-to-retire) librarian at the Goddard Space Flight Center provides experienced advice on the building of a knowledgebase. Librarians from Florida's Orange County Library System describe how they installed wi-fi technology. Photographs and diagrams illustrate how the system works and depict happy library users. Finally, Rutgers University librarians describe a “virtual collaboratory” with industry to develop a course on “Food and Nutrition Business Informatics and Communication” by combining existing technology and resources. A final chapter summarizes the book and suggests that the “agenda” does not provide a complete picture of digital reference. This chapter does not seem particularly useful, especially because technology has already moved on since the conference was held and the book then written. Overall, the strengths of this book are its practicality and the wide variety of contexts and issues discussed. The libraries are diverse: public, academic, large, small, North American, European, supported by government, supported by industry. Details of software and other technology are given. Numerous tables of statistics explain the scope of each project. Plentiful references after every chapter lead to further resources. Even though health sciences environments are not represented, consumer health librarians and anyone who deals with less-than-gracious patrons would find the human aspects interesting. The staffing and evaluation issues are universal, as are the technologies. There are other books on virtual reference, including at least one specifically addressing medical libraries, but anyone considering setting up such a service should probably collect as much as possible on the subject.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».