| Abstract: | ABSTRACT From Jan.-April 1996, the University of Evansville Libraries compared the EBSCODOC and CARL UNCOVER document delivery services in the context of fulfilling article requests that were not completed using the OCLC/ILL subsystem as well as in providing “rush” service. Both services had comparative strengths and weaknesses. EBSCODOC's strength was its comprehensiveness; its weakness was speed of delivery. CARL UNCOVER's strength was the speed and reliability of delivery; its weakness was a 41% rate of fulfillment. Recommendations include further testing of full-text document suppliers in order to identify the best service or services to completely meet the needs of academic libraries. |
