FAQ Library Content Comparison System
The Gold Rush® Library Content Comparison System allows libraries to load their MARC records for either individual or comparative analytics. Remember if you are in a group each library must license the service and load their records for comparative analytics. However, there is still great value even if only one library loads their records for individual library analytics. Here are Frequently Asked Questions about the Content Comparison System as well as documentation.
I would like a basic overview of Gold Rush Collection Analysis.
How do I export records from Gold Rush?
Where can I view some key components of the system?
What are some tips in working with Facets?
Using the publication location facet
How can I create a list of items to weed?
How do I create a list of retention commitments for a particular collection?
Create list of retention commitments
How can I compare a subject or LC class of one library to a group of others?
Compare one library to a group in subject area of psychology
How do I use the pivot table option in the content comparison system?
How can I use the tool to analyze how diverse my collection is compared to other libraries in the consortium?
Why was the system developed?
The Gold Rush® Library Content Comparison system was developed to allow libraries to load their MARC records and compare them with other libraries in the system. It was initially developed to support the Shared Print program of the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries, but is now available to any library or consortium for a modest fee.
What are some use cases for the system?
There are a many possible use cases for the system, some of which could include:
- Shared Print programs among a group of libraries so that libraries can make better decisions about what to weed or put in storage.
- Adding a new program at an institution and the library wants to see how their collection compares to an institution that has a similar program in the same area.
- Cooperative collection development. Analyze your collective holdings to provide additional information to help reduce collection overlap, get improved discounts for backfile purchases, etc.
- Performing quick exports of data sets for participation in other cooperative programs.
- Analyzing a collection for accreditation or membership in another organization.
- Aggregating your group's holdings for exporting to discovery layers either in total or a tailored set
How much does it cost to participate?
Libraries in the Prospector union catalog (Colorado/Wyoming) may use the Library Content Comparison System for free but records need to be loaded from an institution's local integrated library system.
Other libraries or consortia, outside of the Prospector family, may license the system for a low annual fee or may also license the tool on a project basis for any predetermined period of time. There are no set-up charges and the fee is determined by how many MARC records will be contributed. Please contact the Colorado Alliance office if a project-specific quote is desired at help@coalliance.org:
- Less than 1 million MARC records - $1,000/library/year
- 1 million to 2 million MARC records - $1,750/library/year
- 2 million to 3 million MARC records - $2,500/library/year
- 3 million to 4 million MARC records - $3,250/library/year
- 4 million to 5 million MARC records - $4,000/library/year
- 5 million to 6 million MARC records - $4,750/library/year
- 6 million to 7 million MARC records - $5,500/library/year
- 7 million to 8 million MARC records - $6,250/library/year
- 8 million to 9 million MARC records - $7,000/library/year
Discounts are available for consortia or groups of libraries joining under the same contract. We recoginize that there are many specialized use cases and if this pricing doesn't work we are happy to talk with you about your specific situation.
- 2-10 libraries - 10% discount
- 11-20 libraries - 20% discount
- 21-50 libraries - 25% discount
- 50+ - Contact the Alliance to work out deep discount arrangements specific to your needs
How do MARC records get into the system?
Libraries may submit a set of records which will be loaded on behalf of subscribing libraries. The records will be submitted via secure FTP (SFTP) and libraries will have the option of identifying a record set either as a full load which will replace an existing data set or an update which will be incrementally added to the existing data set already loaded. See Upload Guidelines.
Libraries may also load special MARC record files from a vendor or perhaps as part of consideration pool for weeding or storage. Please contact our office for the details on doing this.
How often are records loaded?
The Gold Rush system is updated and reindexed once per month. Many libraries script this process so that it automatically happens.
How are records matched in the system?
MARC records are matched in the system via an algorithm which includes portions of the title, author, publisher, imprint date and a few other elements. The system does not use ISBNs, ISSNs or OCLC numbers since many records do not contain these elements (particularly older records or non-monographs). The current match key match key documentation is available online. Questions and more information about the matching algorithm are available by sending an email to goldrush@coalliance.org.
To see a match key just go into the system, run a search and view the full MARC record and the match key will be clearly labelled near to top of the record.
Can multiple libraries be compared?
Yes, you can compare your library holdings to one or many other libraries.
What is the purpose of the search box?
The search box allows one to search the entire database of all libraries that have been loaded into the system. The "all fields" search indexes almost the entire MARC record. If multiple words are entered, the system does a logical "OR" between the words (but a logical "AND" can also be used.) If you want to search an exact string put the phrase in "quotes." Additional indexes are available for author, title and publisher.
If you only enter terms in the search box and don't select libraries to compare, the entire knowledgebase will be searched. However, if you also select libraries that you want to compare, the particular word/phrase will only be applied to those libraries.
How are the facets used?
Once a search or comparison is done between libraries, users may narrow the results of the comparison with the facets on the left. It is possible to create facets from any elements of a MARC record. If you don't see the facets you need, please contact the Colorado Allliance office at help@coalliance.org to discuss what should be added.
How can searches be saved?
It is possible to create complex queries in the system using the search box, facets and the selection of multiple libraries. By selecting the "Save Search" button these queries can be named and saved for later execution. Use the "Load Search" button to see a list of all saved searches.
How can records be exported?
Once data sets have been created it is posible to export the records in raw MARC, XML, Excel or a delimited format (useful when a delimited set of over 1 million is needed). Select "Export Records" to see the export options. The system will generate a file of the records that have been selected and you will receive an email with a link to the file.
Generic MARC records are being exported and you may not necessarily be receiving back the MARC records that were originally ingested. The Colorado Alliance office will be happy to discuss with you ways to handle these records for special projects.
It typically may take a few minutes to a few hours to receive your exported data set depending on how many records were requested. At the present we have limited exports to sets of less than 5 million records. If you need to export more, this can easily be done by contacting our office. The reason for this limitation is to make sure that monster data sets are not accidentally created that could fill-up directories, since many libraries may be doing this at the same time.
Can Gold Rush load circulation counts?
Gold Rush can load circulation counts if the library can supply them embedded in the MARC records that are deposited. These circulation counts then become a facet in the system where the library can limit a result-set by circ counts of interest (e.g. I want to see everything that has never circulated; or I want to see all results with 3 or more circulation count)
How do I compare journal publisher lists, aggregators, and indexing/abstracting services?
This feature is available in the Gold Rush® Decision Support system, which is separate from the Library Catalog Comparison System. Subscibers to the Library Content Comparison system may use the Gold Rush® Decision Support at no extra charge. Subscribers to the Gold Rush® Decision Support System may just add the difference from their $650/year fee to upgrade to the Library Content Comparison System.
FAQ: Gold Rush® Decision Support
Can more than one database be compared at a time?
Yes, users may compare one-to-one, one-to-many, or many-to-many databases at the same time. Just type in multiple database names in each Set and the system will combine them.
Are all reports run in real-time?
Yes, no matter how many databases are compared the system will provide fast real-time comparisons.
Sometimes when I try to run a report I get an error message that says "An error has occurred!" What's wrong?
When entering databases into a box you will get a pull-down list which matches the character string you have entered. You must select from this pull-down list for a report to properly run. If you just type in a database or provider and just hit carriage return without selecting from the pull down list you will get the error "An error has occurred!". Remember that the system sometimes takes a few seconds for a pull-down list to appear from which you select databases, so give the system a few moments to catch up to you.
How often are databases updated?
Databases are updated on different intervals depending on issues such as how often the publisher or vendor provide us updates and their level of use. After logging into Gold Rush® Decision Support, a list of database updates is provided. This list can be filtered (searched) by entering words into the search box. It can also be sorted (by tapping on a column header) or downloaded.
A database load appears to be old or a title list is not available in Gold Rush®, how do I get these updated or added?
By sending an email to help@coalliance.org. Staff at the Colorado Alliance will work on getting a new database added or existing databases updated as quickly as possible.
What elements are used in title list comparisons?
Title lists are compared with ISSNs or eISSNs. We recognize that not all journals have these elements and that there are issues with title changes and the way vendors/publishers report these fields. So, Gold Rush® comparisons may not always be perfect or exact but should be considered as just one tool in a broader decision making process.
Are dates used in Gold Rush® comparisons?
Gold Rush® loads dates into title lists (when available) but they are not used in the comparisions. However, any date information that has been loaded will be displayed so that this information can be easily viewed.
I know Gold Rush® compares journals, can it be used to compare books or ebooks?
At the present, Gold Rush® only provides comparisions for journals/periodicals.
Are open access titles included?
Gold Rush® does contain many open access title lists such as the Directory of Open Access Journals, BioMed Central, PubMed Central, publisher-based open access packages, and others. It is an interesting exercise to compare commercial packages against some of these open access title lists to determine coverage and overlap.
Can I compare indexed-only databases?
When title lists are loaded in Gold Rush® the system retains not only what journals are full-text but also what are indexed-only titles. These are included in the comparison reports. One can even compare citation-only databases to determine overlap.
Why do some title lists not include dates?
Publishers, vendors, and libraries supply the title lists which populate Gold Rush®. In some cases these entitites provide lists which do not include dates. In these cases, the date fields are left blank.
Why do dates sometimes only appear in the "Notes" field and are not included in the normalized dates for citations or full-text?
Some databases have complex date fields showing gaps, volumes, and other special notes. In these cases, Gold Rush® does not attempt to normalize the data but instead loads these more complex statements into a notes field. This is particularly true for metadata received from library catalogs or shared print archiving metadata sets.
Can I download results?
You can easily download results in popular formats such as Excel, .csv, and PDF. Just select a particular list (unique, common or all journals) and when the list appears on the screen buttons will provide different options. The system also offers the ability to capture comparison charts in popular image formats.
Can I email results?
Although results are returned in real-time to your Web browser, there is a radio button that can be selected that will allow you to email a spreadsheet of the full results. Results will be sent to your login email address. Because of the size of these spreadsheets, an email will be received with a link to the file since many comparisions are so large they would be rejected by your local email system.
Is there a way to compare all journals in all databases to which I subscribe to other databases?
If your library only subscribes to the Decision Support (Reports) portion of Gold Rush®, please provide an export from your current ERMS/link resolver system and we can load it on your behalf as a new "title list" in Gold Rush® so you can use it for future comparisons. The minium required information in the list is a title and ISSN (and/or eISSN) but dates of coverage are also helpful. It's best to get this list in a delimited (e.g. .csv, xlsx) format. If your library uses Gold Rush® for A-Z and link resolver services, just contact goldrush@coalliance.org and ask that your holdings be added as a separate title list in Gold Rush® for comparison purposes.
Gold Rush® Licensing Options
There are a variety of licensing options for Gold Rush®. Select the one that works best for you. To license Gold Rush® or get a custom quote for a group contact us at: goldrush@coalliance.org.
| Type of License | Single Library | 2-10 Libraries | 11-20 Libraries | 20+ Libraries |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
$650 |
$585 |
$550 |
$500 |
|
|
$2,000 |
$1,800 |
$1,700 |
$1,500 |
|
|
$2,000 |
$1,800 |
$1,700 |
$1,500 |
|
|
$4,000 |
$3,600 |
$3,400 |
$3,000 |
LIBRARY CONTENT COMPARISON SYSTEM
License Library Content Comparison System (Also includes Gold Rush Reports at no additional cost)
- Less than 1 million MARC records - $1,000/library/year
- 1 million to 2 million MARC records - $1,750/library/year
- 2 million to 3 million MARC records - $2,500/library/year
- 3 million to 4 million MARC records - $3,250/library/year
- 4 million to 5 million MARC records - $4,000/library/year
- 5 million to 6 million MARC records - $4,750/library/year
- 6 million to 7 million MARC records - $5,500/library/year
Discounts are available for consortia or groups of libraries joining under the same contract. We recognize that there are many specialized use cases and if this pricing doesn't work we are happy to talk with you about your specific situation.
- 2-10 libraries - 10% discount
- 11-20 libraries - 20% discount
- 21-50 libraries - 25% discount
- 50+ - Contact the Alliance to work out deep discount arrangements specific to your needs
About Gold Rush®
Gold Rush® was originally developed in 2001 by the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries to help its member libraries organize their electronic resources. At this time, ERMs were not available in the commercial market place. In 2003, the Alliance began offering Gold Rush® to libraries outside of the consortium. Since this time, libraries throughout the nation have licensed Gold Rush®. In 2016, Gold Rush altered its focus to collection analytics and developed the Gold Rush Library Content Comparison System. The classic Gold Rush services of ERM, link resolution, and A-Z services are still used by a variety of libraries but most now view Gold Rush as an analytics tool.
Gold Rush® continues to be a popular tool due to its regularly updated knowledgebase, it is cost effective, and offers strong customer support.
Gold Rush®
Gold Rush® is a stand-alone electronic resource management system developed by the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries to help libraries or consortia manage subscriptions to electronic resources and provide improved access to these resources for their patrons. Libraries may license Gold Rush as a complete system or they may license individual modules depending on local needs.
Gold Rush® Demos
Features of Gold Rush®
-
Gold Rush® Decision Support (formerly Gold Rush® Reports) allows libraries to do content overlap between electronic resource packages from primary publishers, aggregators and indexing/abstracting services. Users can compare one-to-one or many-to-many in the same simple interface
-
Library Content Comparison System allows libraries to load their MARC records and compare them with other libraries.
-
Subscriptions Module allows libraries to create and track information about their library subscriptions for e-resources such as cost, terms and conditions and contacts. Libraries can easily customize templates with no programmer intervention to tailor the system to local needs.
-
OpenURL link resolution provides seamless access to electronic resources from library catalogs and other directly links to articles.
-
A-Z listing of journals is available to libraries.
Gold Rush® is centrally hosted and requires no programming or management of a local server. It interoperates with any integrated library system and can be folded into your library's Web presence.
Gold Rush® Decision Support (formerly Gold Rush® Reports)
This option allows library staff to compare title lists from over 1,500 aggregators, publishers, and indexing/abstracting services that have been loaded into Gold Rush®. It allows comparison of the content within packages even if the library does not subscribe to them! This is especially helplful to collection development, library administration, and reference staff who are trying to make tough decisions on what products to purchase and cancel.
All reports are generated in real time over the Web and may be viewed on most standard browsers or downloaded into Microsoft Excel™. Title lists are updated on a regular basis in order to provide the latest and best information possible.
A unique feature of this service is that it covers both full-text as well as indexed-only titles.
Electronic Resource Management (Subscriptions)
Subscriptions (Electronic Resource Management) system for monitoring contracts, pricing, and the renewal process. Includes an incident tracker plus the ability to add your own fields and create customized reports.
Gold Rush® OpenURL Linker and A-Z interface
OpenURL link resolver has full compliance for NISO 1.0 and 0.1 standards. Control your own style sheets and results page templates.
Public search interface - A powerful interface offering not only A-Z browsing but full title, keyword and ISSN searching. An XML Gateway available offering sites complete flexibility in designing their own interfaces.
Gold Rush® Knowledge Base
Gold Rush® includes over 1,500 title lists which represents over 100,000 journals from publishers, aggregators and index/abstracting services. Title lists are uploaded on a regular basis to reflect changes in journal titles and coverage dates.
Shared Print Archiving Policies
The Alliance has developed a core set of policies and principles for the Alliance Shared Print Trust. This will allow libraries to work together in areas such as weeding and storage. By working together at the regional and national level, libraries will be better positioned to manage their large print collections as they move into the digital age.
The initial set of policies were approved in May 2015 and Alliance libraries have begun the process of signing the general MOU framework during the summer of 2015. The signed versions have been included in the secure section of this Website.
Alliance Shared Print Trust Agreements
-
Alliance Shared Print Trust - Circulating Monographs (Approved May 2015)
-
Alliance Shared Print Trust - Disclosure Policy (Approved May 2015, rev. October 1, 2018)
-
Alliance Shared Print Trust - Serials Policy (Approved October 2015)
Policies and MOUs from Selected Sites
Polices, MOUs and other interesting material for other library consortia were helpful in developing a local set of rules.
-
WEST
Alliance Shared Print Trust
The Alliance Shared Print Trust was established in 2015 as a way for members of the Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries to make long-term retention commitments on selected print holdings. As libraries move from print to digital holdings, academic libraries have significant legacy physical collections which must either be stored in on-campus libraries or off-campus storage facilities at significant expense. Through making long-term retention commitments, libraries will be able be able to safely weed or store collections without a loss of access for their patrons. The program also helps ensure the integrity of the intellectual record making sure that libraries do not accidentally discard rare or unique materials from the regional or national setting.
Speedy delivery for patron requesting is ensured through combining the Alliance Shared Print Trust with the Prospector union catalog. Using Prospector, patrons will be able to search and request print and digital collections with fast delivery of print materials through a regional courier as local libraries right-size their print holdings.
Alliance Shared Print Trust by the numbers:
- Launched 2015
- 14 regional libraries have signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
- 25-year commitments are made for tagged print holdings through 2040
- Over 1.1 million monographic titles currently have retention commitments
- Programmatic review every 5 years
- Gold Rush analytics has been developed by the Alliance to support the program for itself and other interested libraries around North America
The Alliance Shared Print Trust has not been developed in isolation but in collaboration with other regional programs in North America. The Alliance is a founding member of the Partnership for Shared Book Collections (https://sharedprint.org/) which “coordinates the long-term preservation of, access to, and integrity of monographic print resources in North America.” Several Alliance libraries also participate in the WEST Western Regional Storage Trust (https://cdlib.org/west/) which focuses on the long-term preservation of journals/serials. In addition, several Alliance libraries also participate in the HathiTrust Shared Print Program (https://www.hathitrust.org/shared_print_program). Overlapping participation in shared print programs is encouraged and libraries may tag their cataloging records with duplicate commitments.
Faculty Profile Systems
The Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries facilitated an information sharing meeting on 9/29/2016 covering Faculty Profile Systems and what our member institutions have implemented or are exploring in this regard. We will continue to compile information from our institutions as we receive updates.
University of Colorado, Boulder
Faculty Profile system: Publicly available faculty profiles called, CU Experts, have been implemented using VIVO (http://www.vivoweb.org), which is open source software, see https://experts.colorado.edu/.
CU is also moving from a legacy faculty reporting system to a new system CU Boulder Elements (CUBE), see http://www.colorado.edu/fis/, which is developed using the Symplectic Elements research information management software, part of the Digital Science Group.
CU is also providing a subscription to Altmetric Explorer (also Digital Science) to highlight the impact of CU research through non-traditional metrics.
Institutional Repository system: Digital Commons from bepress (CU Scholar Institutional repository: http://scholar.colorado.edu/)
Data feeds being used: Symplectic software pulls citation data from various sources, such as Web of Science, CrossRef, PubMed, etc. into CUBE. The IR is not yet integrated with faculty research information systems.
ORCID ID use on campus: CU Boulder was able to implement ORCID IDs for all faculty through a grant that was received and have retroactively attached ORCID IDs to older faculty publications as the faculty information system was being built.
Contact Information: Yem Fong (yem.fong@colorado.edu)
Other information: CU Boulder libraries have partnered with the Office of Faculty Affairs to share some subscriptions (Web of Science Incites, ORCID). The library’s role has been one of collaborating and consulting on this project.
Auraria Library
Faculty Profile system: Metropolitan State University of Denver is using Digital Measures. University of Colorado, Denver and Community College of Denver have not implemented a Faculty Profile system.
Institutional Repository system: Sobek
Data feeds being used: none currently
ORCID ID use on campus: Library is encouraging the use of ORCID, but there is no coordinated effort to implement this at the three institutions.
Contact Information: Ellen Metter (ellen.metter@ucdenver.edu)
Other information: Auraria is still encouraging faculty and students to deposit research in their institutional repository, but there is no firm plan to do faculty profiling system-wide going forward.
Colorado State University, Fort Collins
Faculty Profile system: Digital Measures
Institutional Repository system: DSpace (switched from DigiTool just over a year ago)
Data feeds being used: none currently
ORCID ID use on campus: No broad coordinated effort currently, but there is interest and ORCID is mentioned by the college liaisons in communication to faculty and graduate students.
Contact Information: Allison Level (allison.level@colostate.edu)
Other information: Some of CSU’s departments were previously using Digital Measures but starting this year (2016), all departments will be using it for yearly evaluations. T&P documents will also be moving to Digital Measures. The Libraries will be implementing it later this fall.
University of Denver
Faculty Profile system: Digital Measures
Institutional Repository system: Digital Commons from bepress and Islandora/Fedora
Data feeds being used: Feeding data from digital repository into ScholarWorks (also from bepress). Digital Commons is not yet able to get data in an automated way. DU’s Marketing and Communications division wants to build a product to get the Digital Measures data onto the University Website.
ORCID ID use on campus: no coordinated effort as of yet
Contact Information: Sheila Yeh (sheila.yeh@du.edu)
Other information: Through ScholarWorks, faculty should be able to port their profiles to other institutions.
SCDC Minutes
The Shared Collection Development Committee usually meets once per month, sometimes in person and sometimes the meetings are virtual via a conference call and Webinar.
- December 11, 2023
- November 13, 2023
- October 9, 2023
- September 11, 2023
- August 14, 2023
- July 10, 2023
- June 12, 2023
- May 8, 2023
- April 10, 2023
- December 14, 2020
- November 9, 2020
- October 12, 2020
- September 14, 2020
- August 10, 2020
- July 13, 2020
- June 8, 2020
- May 11, 2020
- April 13, 2020
- March 9, 2020
- January 13, 2020
- December 9, 2019
- November 11, 2019
- October 14, 2019
- August 12, 2019
- June 10, 2019
- May 17, 2019
- April 8, 2019
- February 11, 2019
- January 14, 2019
- December 10, 2018
- November 12, 2018
- October 8, 2018
- September 10, 2018
- February 5, 2018
- December 11, 2017
- November 13, 2017
- October 9, 2017
- September 11, 2017
- July 10, 2017
- April 10, 2017
- March 13, 2017
- February 13, 2017
- January 9, 2017
- December 12, 2016
- November 14, 2016
- October 10, 2016
- July 11, 2016
- May 9, 2016
- March 14, 2016
- February 8, 2016
- November 9, 2015
- September 21, 2015
- June 8, 2015
- April 13, 2015
- March 9, 2015
- January 12, 2015
- December 8, 2014
- October 13, 2014
- September 8, 2014
- August, 11 2014
- July 14, 2014
- April 7, 2014
- January 29, 2014
- Oct 28, 2013
- Sep.16, 2013
- July 15, 2013
- May 20, 2013
- April 15 2013
- Oct 15, 2012