Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Garg, Mohit
- Assessment of YouTube Videos on H Index
Abstract Views :299 |
PDF Views:14
Authors
Affiliations
1 Indira Gandhi National Tribal University, Lal Pur, Amarkantak - 484886, Madhya Pradesh, IN
1 Indira Gandhi National Tribal University, Lal Pur, Amarkantak - 484886, Madhya Pradesh, IN
Source
Journal of Information and Knowledge (Formerly SRELS Journal of Information Management), Vol 56, No 1 (2019), Pagination: 18-25Abstract
H index is a popular measure. YouTube provides free of cost video content on different topics. Anyone can upload the videos on YouTube after setting up an account without any verification by experts. Large numbers of videos have been uploaded on YouTube which may or may not be relevant. This study is aimed at evaluating the usefulness of YouTube videos on h-index. YouTube (www.youtube.com) was searched with the search term “h index” on 18th August 2018. The search results were filtered by video type. The first 20 videos were selected for assessment, but after screening the four non-English videos were excluded. These videos have been watched and evaluated based on six aspects. The study found that no video covered all six aspects. 25% of the screened videos were found very useful, 38% of the videos were found slightly useful, 31% of the videos were found moderately useful and only 1 video was found not useful. It was also found that majority of the videos covered definition and example and very few videos discussed advantages of h-index.Keywords
H-Index, Information Quality, Videos, YouTube.References
- Abdelmseih, M. (2016). Evaluation and reliability of YouTube videos for Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) - A warning sign! Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 07(05). https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9570.1000595.
- Abukaraky, A., Hamdan, A., Ameera, M., Nasief, M. and Hassona, Y. (2018). Quality of YouTube TM videos on dental implants. Medicina Oral Patología Oral y Cirugia Bucal, 23(4). https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.22447.
- Ball, P. (2005). Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/436900a.
- Biggs, T.C., Bird, J.H., Harries, P.G. and Salib, R.J. (2013). YouTube as a source of information on rhinosinusitis: The good, the bad and the ugly (1984). Journal Laryngol Otol, 127(8):749-54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215113001473.
- Desai, T., Shariff, A., Dhingra, V., Minhas, D., Eure, M. and Kats, M. (2013). Is content really king? An objective analysis of the public’s response to medical videos on YouTube. PLoS ONE, 8(12):8–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0082469.
- Freeman, B. and Chapman, S. (2007). Is “YouTube” telling or selling you something? Tobacco content on the YouTube video-sharing website. Tobacco Control, 16(3):207–10. https://doi.org/10.1136/tc.2007.020024.
- Garg, N., Venkatraman, A., Pandey, A. and Kumar, N. (2015). YouTube as a source of information on dialysis : A content analysis. Nephrology (Carlton), 20(5):315–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/nep.12397.
- Gupta, H.V., Lee, R.W., Raina, S.K., Behrle, B.L., Hinduja, A. and Mittal, M.K. (2016). Analysis of YouTube as a source of information for peripheral neuropathy. Muscle Nerve, 53:27-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.24916.
- Hassona, Y., Taimeh, D., Marahleh, A. and Scully, C. (2016). YouTube as a source of information on mouth (oral) cancer. Oral Diseases, 22(3):202–08. https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.12434.
- Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. PNAS, 102(46):16569–72. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
- Jaffar, A.A. (2012). YouTube: An emerging tool in anatomy education. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1268.
- Livas, C., Delli, K. and Pandis, N. (2018). “My Invisalign experience”: Content, metrics and comment sentiment analysis of the most popular patient testimonials on YouTube. Progress in Orthodontics, 19(1):1–8. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-017-0201-1.
- Mazanderani, F., Neill, B.O. and Powell, J. (2013). “People power” or “pester power”? YouTube as a forum for the generation of evidence and patient advocacy. Patient Education and Counseling, 93(3):420–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.006.
- NAAC, Revised Accreditation Framework. Accessed on 27th August 2018. Available at http://www.naac.gov.in/docs/latest%20announcement_june18/Guidelines_non_applicable_ metric.pdf.
- Pehlivan, S., Vatansever, N., Oruc, A. and Yildiz, A. (2018). Sufficiency of YouTube videos as a source of information in kidney transplantation. Turkish Nephrology Dialysis and Transplantation Journal, 27(1):39-43. https://doi.org/10.5262/tndt.2017.1003.23.
- Promotion of University Research and Scientific Excellence (PURSE). Department of Science and Technology. Accessed on 27th August 2018. Available at http://dst.gov.in/promotionuniversity-research-and-scientific-excellencepurse.
- The top 500 sites on the web. (2018). Accessed on 02nd September 2018. https://www.alexa.com/topsites. (The sites in the top sites lists are ordered by their 1 month Alexa traffic rank. The 1 month rank is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors and page views over the past month. The site with the highest combination of visitors and page views is ranked #1).
- Implementation of Koha in Managing the E-Resources of the Library
Abstract Views :142 |
PDF Views:9
Authors
Affiliations
1 Central Library, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi – 110016, New Delhi, IN
2 Informatics Publishing Ltd, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru – 560004, Karnataka, IN
1 Central Library, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi – 110016, New Delhi, IN
2 Informatics Publishing Ltd, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru – 560004, Karnataka, IN
Source
Journal of Information and Knowledge (Formerly SRELS Journal of Information Management), Vol 60, No 2 (2023), Pagination: 127-132Abstract
In the digital era, libraries have been acquiring and subscribing to various types of digital resources. Each e-resource possesses distinct formats and search requirements, offers multiple access and authentication methods, and involves complex licensing agreements. Therefore, effectively managing these diverse e-resources necessitates a system that simplifies the processes of acquisition, access, and organization. An Electronic Resource Management System (ERMS) presents a potential solution for centralizing these operations. Numerous open-source and commercial ERMS solutions are available and utilized in libraries worldwide. Nevertheless, numerous studies have revealed that libraries face financial constraints as well as limitations in terms of ICT infrastructure. An ideal solution should be both cost-effective and require minimal ICT infrastructure. Koha is one such software that has gained popularity in library automation, making it a viable option for managing e-resources. This study explores the implementation of Koha 22.11 for managing a library’s e-resources. The study aims to investigate existing features and functionalities of Koha in the context of libraries.Keywords
E-Resources, Electronic Resource Management System, ERMS, IIT Delhi, Koha, Open Source.References
- Asim, M. and Mairaj, M. I. (2019). Librarians’ perceptions about adoption and uses of the Koha integrated library software in Punjab, Pakistan. The Electronic Library, 37(4), 624-635. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-11-2018-0224
- Breeding, M. (2008). The viability of open source ILS. American Society for Information Science and Technology Bulletin, 35(2), 20-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/bult.2008.1720350207
- Chaputula, A. and Kanyundo, A. (2019). Use of Koha-integrated library system by higher education institutions in Malawi. Digital Library Perspectives, 35(3/4), 117-141. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-07-2019-0028
- Chauhan, K. (2018). Evaluation in use of KOHA Library Management Software in OPJGU, Sonipat. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2070
- Egunjobi, R.A. and Awoyemi, R.A. (2012). Library automation with Koha. Library Hi Tech News, 29(3), 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/07419051211241868
- Fournie, J. (2020). Managing electronic resources without buying into the library vendor singularity. Code4Lib Journal, (47).
- Hou, S., Zhang, X., Yi, B. and Tang, Y. (2022). Public attitudes on open source communities in China: A text mining analysis. Technology in Society, 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102112
- Keast, D. (2011). A survey of Koha in Australian special libraries: Open source brings new opportunities to the outback. OCLC Systems and Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 27(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650751111106537
- Macan, B., Vanesa Fernández, G. and Stojanovski, J. (2013). Open source solutions for libraries: ABCD vs Koha. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 47(2), 136-154. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330331311313726
- Madhusudhan, M. and Singh, V. (2016). Integrated library management systems: Comparative analysis of Koha, LibSys, NewGenLib, and Virtua. The Electronic Library, 34(2), 223-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-08-2014-0127
- Pesch, O. (2008). Library standards and E-Resource management: A survey of current initiatives and standards efforts. The Serials Librarian, 55(3), 481-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/03615260802059965
- Sadeh, T. and Ellingsen, M. (2005). Electronic resource management systems: The need and the realization. New Library World, 106(5/6), 208-218. https://doi.org/10.1108/03074800510595823
- Singh, M. and Sanaman, G. (2012). Open source integrated library management systems: Comparative analysis of Koha and NewGenLib. The Electronic Library, 30(6), 809-832. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471211282127
- Mohideen, Z. A., Sheikh, A., Kaur, K., and Tahira, M. (2019). Acceptance of Koha Open Source System among Librarians in the Malaysian Academic Libraries: An Exploratory Qualitative Study. Serials Review, 45(4), 201-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2019.1680248