Most questions had only one choice except for questions 4 and 5 which asked the user to rank several choices. For these two questions, first choices were tallied, since people may have a stronger opinion about their first choice than later choices. If these two questions were not completely filled out, they were analysed as follows:
When respondants left some blank choices, the blanks were given a value which was the average of the unused rating numbers. For example, if there were 5 choices (excluding "other"), and only 3 were ranked, the remaining two were both given a value of 4.5. If the respondant gave an X rating for two or more choices, the options chosen were assigned the average value of the number of choices (1.5 for two choices, 2 for three choices, etc.), and the options not chosen were assigned values as described previously.
1. Professional Affiliation 14 25% Industry 32 57% Academic 8 14% Government 2 4% Other affiliation ==== ==== 56 100% TotalThough our response rate for this survey was only 25%, the percentage of responders who were in different professional affiliation groups was very similar to those of our users as a whole as measured by 209 guestbook signers with known professional affiliation between July 1 and December 13, 1995. Approximately 64% of those signers had academic careers, 21% were in industry, 10% were in government agencies, and 5% in other institutions.
2. Priority for UM-BBD development
32.5 57% More breadth (more pathways)
24.5 43% More depth (more information on each pathway, reaction
and/or compound, or more features, such as search options)
===== ====
57 100% Total (one person voted for both!)
Both more breadth and more depth in the database were recommended.
3. What pathway should be added first? 18 34% PCBs 20 38% anerobic metabolism 10 19% organophosphates 5 9% Other pathway(s) ==== ==== 53 100% TotalBoth PCBs and anerobic metabolism were highly recommended new pathways.
4. What additional information would be most helpful?
(rank from 1-5) N = number of people picking option as 1st choice
ave = average score
N ave
-- ----
4 3.75 more animated reactions
13 2.80 more clickable graphical pathway maps
7 2.94 more information on compounds
7 2.85 more information on reactions
14 2.76 more information on microorganisms
1 Other information
== ====
46 52 (some rated multiple choices with X)
Information on microorganisms and clickable graphical pathway maps
were both highly recommended. Animated reactions had lowest priority.
5. What additional features would be most helpful to you?
(rank from 1-7) N = number of people picking option as 1st choice
ave = average score
N ave
-- ----
8 3.96 Search for CAS Number
1 4.61 Search for Line Formula
1 5.46 Search for SMILES representation
6 3.31 Structure and substructure searching
2 4.01 Synonym search
3 4.63 Search for EC code (three and four digit)
27 2.02 Search for reaction type (oxidation, ring cleavage,
dehalogenation, etc.)
0 Other feature
== ====
48 53 (some rated multiple choices with X)
Search for reaction type was very highly recommended.
Search for SMILES representations had lowest priority.
6. What is your primary use for the database now? 32 58% Research 1 2% Development 7 13% Education 8 15% Research and Education 1 2% Research and Development 6 11% Other use ==== ==== 55 101% Total (some checked more than one choice)Research was the major use, followed by education.
7. Would you like the creation of a moderated UM-BBD listserver, so you could send e-mail messages to and receive messages from other UM-BBD users? 39 74% Yes 14 26% No ==== ==== 53 100% TotalSince a great majority of responders would like such a list, we are exploring its creation.
Page Author(s): Lynda Ellis
Contact Us© 2024, EAWAG. All rights reserved. http://eawag-bbd.ethz.ch/stats3/results1.html