Studies of data-driven deselection overwhelmingly emphasise the importance of circulation counts and date-of-last-use in the weeding process. When applied to research collections, however, this approach fails to take account of highly influential and significant titles that have not been of interest to large numbers of borrowers but that have been highly cited in the literature. It also assumes that past borrowing activity is a reliable indicator of future usage. This study examines the correlations between past and future usage and between borrowing and citation of monographs and concludes that both data elements should be used when deselecting research monographs.