scholarly journals Comparative Analysis of the Bibliographic Data Sources Dimensions and Scopus: An Approach at the Country and Institutional Levels

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote ◽  
Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez ◽  
Abraham Mendoza ◽  
Félix de Moya-Anegón
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Large Fraction ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Scientific Databases ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Document Level

This paper presents a large-scale document-level comparison of two major bibliographic data sources: Scopus and Dimensions. The focus is on the differences in their coverage of documents at two levels of aggregation: by country and by institution. The main goal is to analyze whether Dimensions offers as good new opportunities for bibliometric analysis at the country and institutional levels as it does at the global level. Differences in the completeness and accuracy of citation links are also studied. The results allow a profile of Dimensions to be drawn in terms of its coverage by country and institution. Dimensions’ coverage is more than 25% greater than Scopus which is consistent with previous studies. However, the main finding of this study is the lack of affiliation data in a large fraction of Dimensions documents. We found that close to half of all documents in Dimensions are not associated with any country of affiliation while the proportion of documents without this data in Scopus is much lower. This situation mainly affects the possibilities that Dimensions can offer as instruments for carrying out bibliometric analyses at the country and institutional level. Both of these aspects are highly pragmatic considerations for information retrieval and the design of policies for the use of scientific databases in research evaluation.

scholarly journals Evaluating institutional open access performance: Sensitivity analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Kai Huang ◽  
Cameron Neylon ◽  
Richard Hosking ◽  
Lucy Montgomery ◽  
Katie Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Selection Bias ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Margin Of Error ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Data Source ◽  
Major Data

AbstractIn the article “Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment” we develop the first comprehensive and reproducible workflow that integrates multiple bibliographic data sources for evaluating institutional open access (OA) performance. The major data sources include Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Unpaywall. However, each of these databases continues to update, both actively and retrospectively. This implies the results produced by the proposed process are potentially sensitive to both the choice of data source and the versions of them used. In addition, there remain the issue relating to selection bias in sample size and margin of error. The current work shows that the levels of sensitivity relating to the above issues can be significant at the institutional level. Hence, the transparency and clear documentation of the choices made on data sources (and their versions) and cut-off boundaries are vital for reproducibility and verifiability.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of Dimensions and Scopus bibliographic data sources: an approach to university research productivity

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 706
Author(s):  
Pachisa Kulkanjanapiban ◽  
Tipawan Silwattananusarn
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Scientific Databases ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Significant Comparison ◽  
Citation Counts ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Number Of Citations

<p>This paper shows a significant comparison of two primary bibliographic data sources at the document level of Scopus and Dimensions. The emphasis is on the differences in their document coverage by institution level of aggregation. The main objective is to assess whether Dimensions offers at the institutional level good new possibilities for bibliometric analysis as at the global level. The results of a comparative study of the citation count profiles of articles published by faculty members of Prince of Songkla University (PSU) in Dimensions and Scopus from the year the databases first included PSU-authored papers (1970 and 1978, respectively) through the end of June 2020. Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis of 19,846 articles indexed in Dimensions and 13,577 indexed in Scopus. The main finding was that the number of citations received by Dimensions was highly correlated with citation counts in Scopus. Spearman’s correlation between citation counts in Dimensions and Scopus was a high and mighty relationship. The findings mainly affect Dimensions’ possibilities as instruments for carrying out bibliometric analysis of university members’ research productivity. University researchers can use Dimensions to retrieve information, and the design policies can be used to evaluate research using <br />scientific databases.</p>

scholarly journals Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Martijn Visser ◽  
Nees Jan van Eck ◽  
Ludo Waltman
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
The Other ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Document Type ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Microsoft Academic ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Comprehensive Coverage

We present a large-scale comparison of five multidisciplinary bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. The comparison considers scientific documents from the period 2008–2017 covered by these data sources. Scopus is compared in a pairwise manner with each of the other data sources. We first analyze differences between the data sources in the coverage of documents, focusing for instance on differences over time, differences per document type, and differences per discipline. We then study differences in the completeness and accuracy of citation links. Based on our analysis, we discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the different data sources. We emphasize the importance of combining a comprehensive coverage of the scientific literature with a flexible set of filters for making selections of the literature.

scholarly journals National bibliographic data for studies of social sciences and humanities: towards interoperability

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 02002
Author(s):  
Linda Sīle ◽  
Peter Aspeslagh ◽  
Joshua Eykens ◽  
Raf Guns
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Multiple Data Sources ◽  
Knowledge Domains ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Multiple Data ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Methodological Aspects

National bibliographic data bring numerous opportunities for science studies, especially when integrating data from multiple data sources. The use of multiple data sources, however, is hindered by the lack of interoperability. Although progress has been made in developing persistent international identifiers such as ISBN, DOI, and GRID, the interoperability between different data sources still poses challenges at several levels. We reflect upon these challenges with a focus on conceptual and methodological aspects with respect to the Academic Book Publisher Register (ABP), a comprehensive international list of publishers that is created by integrating multiple publisher lists used in different countries. This register, currently in development, is primarily meant to be used in research evaluation settings. At the same time it is potentially a valuable source of data for studies focused on publishing in different knowledge domains. In discussing the challenges encountered while making the ABP, we focus on two main issues: delineation of publishers and establishing connection between local lists and the ABP. In this paper we discuss possible ways to overcome these obstacles and draw conclusions in relation to other data sources that can be of use in research within the social sciences and humanities.

Impact of Globalisation on Pandemics: A comparative study on SARS and Covid-19 (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann Johann And Devika
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Economic Stability ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World ◽  
Close Relationship

BACKGROUND Since November 2019, Covid - 19 has spread across the globe costing people their lives and countries their economic stability. The world has become more interconnected over the past few decades owing to globalisation and such pandemics as the Covid -19 are cons of that. This paper attempts to gain deeper understanding into the correlation between globalisation and pandemics. It is a descriptive analysis on how one of the factors that was responsible for the spread of this virus on a global scale is globalisation. OBJECTIVE - To understand the close relationship that globalisation and pandemics share. - To understand the scale of the spread of viruses on a global scale though a comparison between SARS and Covid -19. - To understand the sale of globalisation present during SARS and Covid - 19. METHODS A descriptive qualitative comparative analysis was used throughout this research. RESULTS Globalisation does play a significant role in the spread of pandemics on a global level. CONCLUSIONS - SARS and Covid - 19 were varied in terms of severity and spread. - The scale of globalisation was different during the time of SARS and Covid - 19. - Globalisation can be the reason for the faster spread in Pandemics.

scholarly journals A Large-Scale COVID-19 Twitter Chatter Dataset for Open Scientific Research—An International Collaboration

Epidemiologia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-324
Author(s):  
Juan M. Banda ◽  
Ramya Tekumalla ◽  
Guanyu Wang ◽  
Jingyuan Yu ◽  
Tuo Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Social Dynamics ◽  
Additional Data ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Research Groups ◽  
The World ◽  
Data Source

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread worldwide, an unprecedented amount of open data is being generated for medical, genetics, and epidemiological research. The unparalleled rate at which many research groups around the world are releasing data and publications on the ongoing pandemic is allowing other scientists to learn from local experiences and data generated on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is a need to integrate additional data sources that map and measure the role of social dynamics of such a unique worldwide event in biomedical, biological, and epidemiological analyses. For this purpose, we present a large-scale curated dataset of over 1.12 billion tweets, growing daily, related to COVID-19 chatter generated from 1 January 2020 to 27 June 2021 at the time of writing. This data source provides a freely available additional data source for researchers worldwide to conduct a wide and diverse number of research projects, such as epidemiological analyses, emotional and mental responses to social distancing measures, the identification of sources of misinformation, stratified measurement of sentiment towards the pandemic in near real time, among many others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document