AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This two-part paper aims to identify the main transferable lessons learned from both the quantitative and qualitative evaluations of the Knowledge Access 24 (KA24) service of online databases and selected full-text journals for health and social care staff in London and the south-east of England. The quantitative evaluation analysed usage rates and user registration with the objective of measuring uptake by previously disadvantaged staff, and to inform the subsequent qualitative survey.\ud \ud METHODS: User and usage data were analysed by type of NHS Trust, by type of user, and by what was being used. The evaluation assessed development in user registration and usage of both databases and journals over a 2-year period. Data were aggregated and analysed both monthly and quarterly.\ud \ud RESULTS: Usage levels increased, but uptake in both the mental health and primary care sectors was comparatively slow. Nurses and allied professionals used the service more than doctors. The increase in usage of full-text journals over the usage of databases was marked.\ud \ud CONCLUSIONS: Previously disadvantaged staff used electronic resources. A qualitative survey was needed to identify the main enablers and barriers to uptake
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.