Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies

Baas, Jeroen; Schotten, Michiel; Plume, Andrew; Côté, Grégoire; Karimi, Reza

doi:10.1162/qss_a_00019

Cited by 758 publications

(503 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

326

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…WoS covers over 75 million records in its Core Collection (which includes its main citation indexes), and up to 155 million records when other regional and subject-specific citation indexes are included (Birkle et al 2020 ). Scopus claims to cover over 76 million records (Baas et al 2020 ). Google Scholar does not disclose official figures about its coverage (Van Noorden 2014 ), but the most recent independent studies have estimated that it covers well over 300 million records (Delgado López-Cózar et al 2019 ; Gusenbauer 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New sources of citation data have recently become available, such as Microsoft Academic, Dimensions, and the OpenCitations Index of CrossRef open DOI-to-DOI citations (COCI). Although these have been compared to the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS), Scopus, or Google Scholar, there is no systematic evidence of their differences across subject categories. In response, this paper investigates 3,073,351 citations found by these six data sources to 2,515 English-language highly-cited documents published in 2006 from 252 subject categories, expanding and updating the largest previous study. Google Scholar found 88% of all citations, many of which were not found by the other sources, and nearly all citations found by the remaining sources (89–94%). A similar pattern held within most subject categories. Microsoft Academic is the second largest overall (60% of all citations), including 82% of Scopus citations and 86% of WoS citations. In most categories, Microsoft Academic found more citations than Scopus and WoS (182 and 223 subject categories, respectively), but had coverage gaps in some areas, such as Physics and some Humanities categories. After Scopus, Dimensions is fourth largest (54% of all citations), including 84% of Scopus citations and 88% of WoS citations. It found more citations than Scopus in 36 categories, more than WoS in 185, and displays some coverage gaps, especially in the Humanities. Following WoS, COCI is the smallest, with 28% of all citations. Google Scholar is still the most comprehensive source. In many subject categories Microsoft Academic and Dimensions are good alternatives to Scopus and WoS in terms of coverage.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, three citation-related parameters were considered for the reference year of 2018 (Table 1): number of citations to articles published in 1996-2018; journal citation impact (as measured by CiteScore); and journal rank or percentile in the field of education (a field of 1038 journals). Both CiteScore and journal rank expressed in percentiles are simple and transparent measures that address the criticisms of the impact factor by not discriminating by document type (Baas et al 2020).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scopus provides the best overview of the structure of world science, including most of the journals in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (Moya et al 2007;Sugimoto and Larivière 2018;Baas et al 2020). Traditionally, the "best" or most prestigious journals in a given field have been defined as the most read or most cited, and the metrics used here capture these criteria.…”

Section: Data Sources and Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The prestige economy of higher education journals: a quantitative approach

Kwiek

2020

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study addresses stratification in the global higher education research community and the changing geography of country affiliations in six elite journals. The distribution of country affiliations is analyzed from a longitudinal perspective (1996-2018), and fulltime and part-time authors in the field are contrasted. The prestige maximization model and principal-agent theory provide the theoretical framework for the study, which examines 6334 articles published in six elite journals in the context of 21,442 articles in 41 core journals. The findings indicate that about 3.3% of academics have authored at least five articles (full-timers). These authors constitute the publishing core of the research community, while the 80% who have authored one article (part-timers) constitute its periphery. Higher Education (HE) and Studies in Higher Education (SHE) emerge as elite global journals, with an increasing share of non-Anglo-Saxon authors. Previously globally invisible countries became visible almost exclusively through HE and SHE. Global trends include the diminishing role of American researchers and the increasing role of researchers from Continental Europe, East Asia, and the cluster of 66 "other" countries. The single biggest affiliation loser is the United States, which had 42.5% of country affiliations in 1996-2003 but only 26.9% in 2012-2018. This reflects both the increasing share of non-American affiliations and the increasing yearly volume of HE and SHE publications, in which US academics tend not to publish massively.

show abstract

“…The search and data extraction was done in Scopus, due to the fact that it has a greater number of peer-reviewed journals [24].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bibliometric analysis of Scopus indexed publications on polymyxin resistance (2009-2018)

Quincho-Lopez¹,

Pacheco‐Mendoza²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Antimicrobial resistance is a serious public health problem that has become a global threat. Special attention should be given to polymyxins (polymyxin B and colistin) which, since their reintroduction into clinical practice, are considered "last resort" drugs. The objective of this study is to perform a bibliometric analysis of scientific research on polymyxin resistance.Methods: Scopus database was used to retrieve documents relevant to polymyxin resistance. At the beginning, all kinds of documents without year restrictions were included. Subsequently, the study period (2009-2018) was limited and analyzed using SciVal. Specifically, the 10 institutions and countries with the highest production, authors, journals, and most cited articles were analyzed. The growth of publications and citations was graphed, in addition to an analysis of the keywords using VOSviewer.Results: A total of 1,306 documents were retrieved (1947-2019). Original articles (76.95%) and letters to the editor (15.47%) were the most frequent types of documents. English was the predominant language with 1,270 documents (97.2%). In the period 2009-2018, there was a significant growth in publications (p-value < 0.001) retrieving 833 (64%) documents. The received citations were 23,974, with a peak in 2016 (8,033 citations). The United States and China lead the scientific production with 146 (17.5%) and 137 (16.4%) publications, respectively. University of Fribourg (Switzerland) was the most productive institution on the subject (44 documents), although University of Zhejiang (China) has caused the greatest impact (73.5 citations/article). Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy ranked first with 140 documents. Most of the documents were published in quartile 1 journals (82.7% and 69.1%, according to Scimago Journal & Country Rank and CiteScore, respectively).Conclusions: The number of documents on polymyxin resistance has increased significantly in the recent years. In the last few years alone, 64% of all documents have been published. The United States and China lead the scientific production. Greater efforts are still needed to tackle this global problem.

show abstract

Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies

Cited by 758 publications

References 31 publications

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations

Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations

The prestige economy of higher education journals: a quantitative approach

Bibliometric analysis of Scopus indexed publications on polymyxin resistance (2009-2018)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About