Discrepancies among Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed coverage of funding information in medical journal articles

Objective: The overall aim of the present study was to compare the coverage of existing research funding information for articles indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases.Methods: The numbers of articles with funding information published in 2015 were identified in the three selected...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Journal of the Medical Library Association Ročník 106; číslo 1; s. 81 - 86
Hlavní autoři: Kokol, Peter, Blažun Vošner, Helena
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: United States Medical Library Association 01.01.2018
University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
Témata:
Abstracting and Indexing - statistics & numerical data
Abstracting and indexing services
Academic publications
Bibliographic data bases
Bibliometrics
Citations
Comparative analysis
Databases, Factual - standards
Databases, Factual - statistics & numerical data
Discrepancies
Evaluation
Finance
Funding Acknowledgment
Funding Patterns
Humans
Information
Information Storage and Retrieval - statistics & numerical data
Journal as Topics
Media coverage
Medical journals
Medical research
Medicine
Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data
Research Funding
Researchers
Scientometrics
Surveys and Studies
United States
ISSN:1536-5050, 1558-9439, 1558-9439
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Objective: The overall aim of the present study was to compare the coverage of existing research funding information for articles indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases.Methods: The numbers of articles with funding information published in 2015 were identified in the three selected databases and compared using bibliometric analysis of a sample of twenty-eight prestigious medical journals.Results: Frequency analysis of the number of articles with funding information showed statistically significant differences between Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases. The largest proportion of articles with funding information was found in Web of Science (29.0%), followed by PubMed (14.6%) and Scopus (7.7%).Conclusion: The results show that coverage of funding information differs significantly among Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases in a sample of the same medical journals. Moreover, we found that, currently, funding data in PubMed is more difficult to obtain and analyze compared with that in the other two databases. This article has been approved for the Medical Library Association’s Independent Reading Program.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1536-5050
1558-9439
1558-9439
DOI:10.5195/jmla.2018.181