Include your dataset

Survey results of academic / health science library roles in providing support for electronic lab notebooks
Internal Dataset

UID: 25

Author(s): Iwema, Carrie L.*+, Ratajeski, Melissa A.+, Bower, Margarete+, Mattern, Eleanor, Sowa, Ashley * Corresponding Author + University of Pittsburgh Author
Description
University of Pittsburgh librarians at the Health Sciences Library System and the University Library System conducted an 18-question Qualtrics survey in 2017 to learn what roles other academic and health sciences libraries are playing at their institutions in providing services and support to their users regarding electronic lab notebooks (ELNs). The PDF contains the survey questions, which are a mix of multiple choice and free text. The CSV file contains de-identifed survey responses (indicated as #####).
Timeframe
2017
Keywords
Academic libraries
Electronic Lab Notebooks
Information Science
Laboratory notebooks
Libraries, Medical
Library Surveys
Research Data Management
Research Notebooks
Research Support Services
Access via figshare

Raw data and survey questions

Access Restrictions
Free to all
Access Instructions
Freely available via figshare.
Associated Publications
Iwema, CL, Ratajeski, MA. Creating new research services: library support for electronic lab notebooks. Paper presented at: 118th Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association, 2018 May 18-23, Atlanta, GA.
Data Type
Survey
Software Used
Qualtrics

Web-based survey platform

Dataset Format(s)
CSV (.csv), PDF (.pdf)
Resource Type(s)
Dataset
Dataset Size
27kB (CSV); 205kB (PDF)
Data Catalog Record Updated
2019-06-19

Notice and Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this catalog is provided as a courtesy, as is, and with no representations or warranties of any kind. When you contact the responsible individual(s) listed in each record, or, where applicable, access a data repository listed, you will be subject to terms and conditions required by the data custodian/data repository. The University of Pittsburgh does not attempt to judge the scholarly quality of the data referenced and relies on the judgment and research expertise of those who created and/or deposited it.