Completeness degree of publication metadata in eight free-access scholarly databases

Author:

Delgado-Quirós Lorena12ORCID,Ortega José Luis12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Institute for Advanced Social Studies (IESA-CSIC), Córdoba, Spain

2. Joint Research Unit Knowledge Transfer and Innovation (UCO-CSIC), Córdoba, Spain

Abstract

Abstract The main objective of this study is to compare the amount of metadata and the completeness degree of research publications in new academic databases. Using a quantitative approach, we selected a random Crossref sample of more than 115,000 records, which was then searched in seven databases (Dimensions, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, OpenAlex, Scilit, Semantic Scholar, and The Lens). Seven characteristics were analyzed (abstract, access, bibliographic info, document type, publication date, language, and identifiers), to observe fields that describe this information, the completeness rate of these fields, and the agreement among databases. The results show that academic search engines (Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, and Semantic Scholar) gather less information and have a low degree of completeness. Conversely, third-party databases (Dimensions, OpenAlex, Scilit, and The Lens) have more metadata quality and a higher completeness rate. We conclude that academic search engines lack the ability to retrieve reliable descriptive data by crawling the web, and the main problem of third-party databases is the loss of information derived from integrating different sources.

Funder

Agencia Estatal de Investigación

Publisher

MIT Press

Reference33 articles.

1. The effect of data sources on the measurement of open access: A comparison of Dimensions and the Web of Science;Basson;PLOS ONE,2022

2. AI2 joins forces with Microsoft Research to upgrade search tools for scientific studies;Boyle;GeekWire,2018

3. The continuum of metadata quality: Defining, expressing, exploiting;Bruce,2004

4. The Microsoft Academic Knowledge Graph enhanced: Author name disambiguation, publication classification, and embeddings;Färber;Quantitative Science Studies,2022

5. Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science;Franceschini;Journal of Informetrics,2016

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3