UM-BBD User Survey Results3

UM-BBD User Survey Results
April 10, 1998

[BBD Main Menu] [Search] [About the UM-BBD] [What's New] [Guest Book] [Contributors] [Guided Tour] [Publications] [Useful Internet Resources] [Acknowledgements] [Use Statistics]

The Third Annual User Survey was sent to 389 members of the UM-BBD e-mail user list on April 10, 1998. 68 responded as of April 28, 1998 for a 17% response rate, similar to last year.

Where responders chose two or more items in a question, their vote was divided by the number of choices they made, e.g. 2 choices each counted as 0.5. User comments are reported on a separate page.


1. Professional Affiliation (choose one)
 
16  24%  Industry 
 
42  62%  Academic 

 9  13%  Government 

 1   1%  Other affiliation, please specify
           independent consultant
== ====
68 100%
User affiliation percentages are similar to those of last year.


2. Priority for UM-BBD development (choose one)

39  58%  More breadth (more pathways, reactions, and/or 
          compounds)     

28  42%  More depth (more information on each pathway, 
          reaction and/or compound, or more features, such as 
          search options)
== ======
67 100%
Two respondants selected both. For the second year in a row, uses feel we most need more breath (more pathways).


3. What additional feature, format, or type of information would 
    be most helpful?  (choose one)

17 25% More higher-level pathways (metapathways) which 
        summarize information from several UM-BBD pathways.

22 33% Ability to enter a compound structure and see structually
        similar UM-BBD compounds

 0  0% Faster page loading

27 40% Ability to predict biodegradation pathway(s) for 
        compounds not in the UM-BBD

 1  1% UM-BBD on a CD-ROM
==  ===
67  99%
Users would find predictive ability, structure searching, and metapathways most useful. Few or none gave priority to UM-BBD on a CD-ROM or faster page loading.


4.  What additional feature, format, or type of information
     would you or your institution or organization be most 
     willing to pay to use?  (choose one)

30  45% Nothing

 8  12% More higher-level pathways (metapathways) which 
         summarize information from several UM-BBD pathways.

 6   9% Ability to enter a compound structure and see structually
         similar UM-BBD compounds

 0   0% Faster page loading

13  19% Ability to predict biodegradation pathway(s) for 
         compounds not in the UM-BBD

10  15% UM-BBD on a CD-ROM
=======
67 100%
Almost half of users would not pay for additional functions. The others would be most willing to pay for predictive ability, structure searching, metapathways, or a UM-BBD CD-ROM.


5.  What is the most useful type of UM-BBD information for you? 
    (choose one)

43.7 66% Pathways and Metapathways (text, graphics, significance 
          statements, links to organism information, dynamic 
          pathway generation) 

12   18% Reaction (text, graphics, links to literature, 
          sequences, enzymes)

 7   11% Compound (text, graphics, formula, CAS Reg. Number,
          links)

 3.3  5% Useful Internet Resources page
==   ====
66   100%
Pathway information is most useful.


6. What is your primary use for the database now? (choose one)

24  35% Research   

17  25% Research and Development

 4   6% Development 

 0   0% Development and Education

 4   6% Education  

16  24% Research and Education

 3   4% Other use, please specify
== ====
68 100%
As in past years, research is the major use.


7. Any other comments, suggestions for pathways to include, etc.


[BBD Main Menu] [Search] [About the UM-BBD] [What's New] [Guest Book] [Contributors] [Guided Tour] [Publications] [Useful Internet Resources] [Acknowledgements] [Use Statistics]

Page Author(s): Lynda Ellis

Contact Us
© 2024, EAWAG. All rights reserved.

http://eawag-bbd.ethz.ch/stats3/results3.html