Baker, G. and Read, E. J. 2008. Vendor-supplied usage data for electronic resources: a survey of academic libraries. Learned publishing, Vol. 21, no.1: 258-60.
Boukacem-Zeghmouri, C. and Schopfel, J. 2012. Statistics usage by French academic libraries: a survey. Learned publishing, Vol. 25, no. 4: 271-278.
Conyers, A. 2006. Usage statistics and online behaviour (2).The E-Resources Management Handbook. Available at: https://www.uksg.org/sites/uksg.org/files/8-Conyers-vs2-084T9864 6X2RN62K. pdf.
COUNTER Online Metrics. 2012. The COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources: Release 4. Available at: www.projectCounter.org
Covey, D.T. 2002. Usage and usability assessment: Library Practices and Concerns. Digital Library Federation. Available at: http://works. bepress.com /denise troll covey/43/.
Davis, P. M. 2004. For Electronic Journals, Total Downloads can Predict Number of Users. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 4, no. 3: 379–392. Available at: https://core.ac.uk /download/ pdf/4902291.pdf
Davis, P. M. and Price, J.S. 2005. E-Journal interface can influence usage statistics: implications for libraries, publishers, and Project COUNTER. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 1-22
Fleming-May, R. A. and Grogg, J. E. 2010. Measuring E-Resource Use: Standards and Practice for Counting Remote Users. Available at: https:// americanlibraries magazine. org/2010/08/23/measuring-e-resource-use-standards-and-practice-for-counting-remote-users/.
H. K. Chakraborty and Chakraborty, B. 2002. E-journal: Coming of Age. Paper presented at International Caliber Conference, February 2002, at Rajasthan, India.Available at: http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in /dxml/1944/36/browse.
Hao-Re K., Kwakkelaar, R., Yu-Min, T. and Li-Chun, C. (2002). Exploring behaviour of e-journal users in science and technology: Transaction log analysis of Elsevier's Science Direct on Site in Taiwan. Library & Information Science Research, Vol. 24, no.3: 265–291.
ICOLC - International Coalition of Library Consortia. 2006. Guidelines for Statistical Measures of Usage of Web-Based Information Resources (1998, revised 2001, 2006). Available at http://icolc.net/ statement/guidelines-statistical-measures-usage-web-based-information-resources-1998-revised-2001-0
Jung, Y. and Kim, J. 2013. Hybrid standard platform for e-journal usage statistics management. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, Vol. 215:1105–1115. Available at: doi10.1007/978-94-007-5860-5_132.
Jung, Y., Kim, J., So, M. and Kim, H. 2015. Statistical relationships between journal use and research output at academic institutions in South Korea. Scientometrics, Vol. 103: 751–777. Available at: doi 10.1007/s11192-015-1563-0
Kennedy, M. R. and Laguardia, C. 2014. Marketing your libraries electronic resources: A how-to-do-it manual for librarians. India: DBSI Imprints.
Londhe, N.L. and Deshpande, N. J. 2013. Usage Study of UGC-INFONET EIR at University of Pune. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, Vol. 33, no. 5: 385-393.
McDonald, J. D. 2006. Understanding online journal usage: A statistical analysis of citation and use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57, no.13. Available at: http:// doi.org/ 10.1002/asi.20420
Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Jamali, H. R., Rowlands, I. and Tenopir, C. 2008. Viewing and Reading Behaviour in a Virtual Environment : The Full-Text Download and What Can Be Read Into It. School of Information Sciences Publications and Other Works. Available at http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_infosciepubs/6
Noonan, C. F. and McBurney, M. K. 2007. Application of electronic serial usage statistics in a national laboratory. Usage statistics of e-serials. C.F. David (Ed). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Information Press.
Prathap, G. 2013. E-Resources Usage and Research Productivity. Annals of Library and Information Studies, Vol. 60, no.1: 64–65.
Project COUNTER-Consistent, Credible, Comparable (n.d). Available at: https:// www. projectcounter.org/
Rathemacher, A. 2010. E-journal Usage Statistics in Collection Management Decisions: A Literature Review. Library Data: Empowering Practice and Persuasion, 71–89.
Sewell, J.M., Adejoro, O.O., Fleck, J.R., Wolfson, J.A. and Konety, B.R. 2015. Factors associated with the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) for Urology and Nephrology Journals. International Brazilian Journal of Urology, Vol.41, no.6: 1058-1066. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538. IBJU. 2014.0497.
Sharma, M., Sarin, A., Gupta, P., Sachdeva, S. and Desai, A. V. 2014. Journal Impact Factor: Its Use, Significance and Limitations. World Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Vol.13, no 2: 146. Available at: doi10.4103/1450-1147.139151
Shepher, P. n.d. The Journal Usage Factor project: results, recommendations and next steps. Full Report in Usage-based measures of journal impact and quality web page. Available at: https://www.uksg.org/usagefactors
Suseela, V.J. 2011. Application of usage statistics for assessing the use of e-journals in University of Hyderabad: A case study. Electronic Library, Vol. 29, no. 6: 751 – 761.
Yu, T., Yu, G., Song, Y. and Wang, M.Y. 2018. Toward the more effective identification of journals with anomalous self-citation. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol. 23, no.2: 25-46.
A case study of association between usage of online journals and their impact factors was conducted for the subscribed journals of the Health Sciences Library of Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. The publisher-generated usage statistics were collected and tabulated for the period 2010-2015. The full text usage was considered as the criteria for identification of the extent of usage of online journals from different publishers. The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) of these journals were retrieved in 2015 from Journal Citation Report to check whether association existed between the most used and the least used journals with their impact factor. The study identified two lists of journals, the most used and the least used journals, from among the subscribed online journals through the usage analysis. ‘Mann Whitney U test’ was performed to check the association between the usage of online journals and their impact factors. It was observed that there is a statistically significant difference (p<0.001) in the impact factors of the most used journals and the least used journals, which indicated that an association existed between the IFs and the usage. The application of the outcome measures of the study provide a benchmark for the online journal collection for the libraries that explore the usage of its online resources. Study also propositions the means for increasing the usage of subscribed online journals.