Qom University of Medical Sciences Journal

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to calculate the cost spent to develop databases Scopus, Science Direct, and Ovid and compare it with the rate of use and permeability in order to select beneficial collections and determine the position of these resources among the users in Qom University of Medical Sciences.

Methods: The present study is practical in terms of purpose and survey in terms of method, and is a type of detachment analysis report. The statistical population of the research included: Shared university electronic information resources, such as e-journals and accessible databases of two citation databases, Science Direct and Scopus versus Ovid in years 2014. Information was collected using two methods of frequency of use and cost-benefit analysis. Data were analyzed by chi-square test.

Results: The frequency of use, based to SAMAA index (number of paper download in the format of the HTML and PDF, number of abstract download, and number of searching and sitting down) in the databases Science Direct and Scopus and Ovid was significantly different, so that among these three databases, Science Direct and Scopus had the highest rate of use. The use and cost-benefit of the fields of medicine in these three databases were significantly different from each other, and medical subject area in the databases Scopus and Science Direct was higher than Ovid. No significant difference was observed between the rates of use of user groups (faculty members and staff, students) in the two databases.

Conclusion: Considering the duration (about 20 minutes) of the users’ use of electronic resources, it can be concluded that the rate of use in the studied population is very low.