亲爱的研友该休息了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整地填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!身体可是革命的本钱,早点休息,好梦!

Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals

斯科普斯 医学 引用 科学网 四分位间距 梅德林 置信区间 文献计量学 图书馆学 荟萃分析 内科学 计算机科学 政治学 法学
作者
Abhaya V. Kulkarni,Brittany Aziz,Iffat Shams,Jason W. Busse
出处
期刊:JAMA [American Medical Association]
卷期号:302 (10): 1092-1092 被引量:685
标识
DOI:10.1001/jama.2009.1307
摘要

Context

Until recently, Web of Science was the only database available to track citation counts for published articles. Other databases are now available, but their relative performance has not been established.

Objective

To compare the citation count profiles of articles published in general medical journals among the citation databases of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.

Design

Cohort study of 328 articles published in JAMA, Lancet, or the New England Journal of Medicine between October 1, 1999, and March 31, 2000. Total citation counts for each article up to June 2008 were retrieved from Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Article characteristics were analyzed in linear regression models to determine interaction with the databases.

Main Outcome Measures

Number of citations received by an article since publication and article characteristics associated with citation in databases.

Results

Google Scholar and Scopus retrieved more citations per article with a median of 160 (interquartile range [IQR], 83 to 324) and 149 (IQR, 78 to 289), respectively, than Web of Science (median, 122; IQR, 66 to 241) (P < .001 for both comparisons). Compared with Web of Science, Scopus retrieved more citations from non–English-language sources (median, 10.2% vs 4.1%) and reviews (30.8% vs 18.2%), and fewer citations from articles (57.2% vs 70.5%), editorials (2.1% vs 5.9%), and letters (0.8% vs 2.6%) (all P < .001). On a log10-transformed scale, fewer citations were found in Google Scholar to articles with declared industry funding (nonstandardized regression coefficient, −0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.15 to −0.03), reporting a study of a drug or medical device (−0.05; 95% CI, −0.11 to 0.01), or with group authorship (−0.29; 95% CI, −0.35 to −0.23). In multivariable analysis, group authorship was the only characteristic that differed among the databases; Google Scholar had significantly fewer citations to group-authored articles (−0.30; 95% CI, −0.36 to −0.23) compared with Web of Science.

Conclusion

Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar produced quantitatively and qualitatively different citation counts for articles published in 3 general medical journals.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
科研通AI6应助YHF2采纳,获得10
10秒前
19秒前
crane完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
华仔应助Raien采纳,获得10
27秒前
liyuchen完成签到,获得积分10
39秒前
duan完成签到 ,获得积分10
43秒前
maclogos完成签到,获得积分10
44秒前
56秒前
1分钟前
雨城完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
mrjohn完成签到,获得积分0
1分钟前
1分钟前
丘比特应助doublenine18采纳,获得30
1分钟前
wwww威完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
YHF2发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
YHF2完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
2分钟前
doublenine18发布了新的文献求助30
2分钟前
2分钟前
李丹阳完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
Criminology34举报zz求助涉嫌违规
3分钟前
3分钟前
Bin_Liu发布了新的文献求助10
3分钟前
3分钟前
3分钟前
科研通AI6应助风华正茂采纳,获得10
3分钟前
3分钟前
橘橘橘子皮完成签到 ,获得积分10
3分钟前
3分钟前
3分钟前
布吉岛呀完成签到 ,获得积分10
3分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
风华正茂发布了新的文献求助10
4分钟前
deng203完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
5分钟前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Encyclopedia of Reproduction Third Edition 3000
Comprehensive Methanol Science Production, Applications, and Emerging Technologies 2000
化妆品原料学 1000
Psychology of Self-Regulation 600
1st Edition Sports Rehabilitation and Training Multidisciplinary Perspectives By Richard Moss, Adam Gledhill 600
Red Book: 2024–2027 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 计算机科学 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 复合材料 内科学 化学工程 人工智能 催化作用 遗传学 数学 基因 量子力学 物理化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5639678
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 4749674
关于积分的说明 15007074
捐赠科研通 4797837
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2563943
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1522817
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1482514