排序方式： 共有50条查询结果，搜索用时 500 毫秒
1.
N. Yu. Berezkina O. N. Sikorskaya 《Scientific and Technical Information Processing》2008,35(6):256-259
The publication activity of Russian and Belarussian scientists, the degree of reflection of their papers in Scopus databases, and the data on the citation of Belarussian authors in the works of other researchers are discussed. 相似文献
2.
Carmen Cole Angela R. Davis Vanessa Eyer John J. Meier 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2018,44(3):419-425
In 2008 Meier and Conkling first tested Google Scholar's coverage of the engineering literature against citations gathered from the Compendex database. Since that time, other studies have used the same methodology and found improvement in Google Scholar's coverage. This study uses engineering dissertations from Proquest Dissertations & Theses to create a data set of citations for the comparison of fee-based databases, Compendex and Scopus, against Google Scholar. From 1950 to 2017 Google Scholar outperformed both Compendex and Scopus in discoverability of citations in nine engineering subjects. These results have implications for collection management and information literacy program planning for librarians. 相似文献
3.
Mike Thelwall 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(2):430-435
Dimensions is a partly free scholarly database launched by Digital Science in January 2018. Dimensions includes journal articles and citation counts, making it a potential new source of impact data. This article explores the value of Dimensions from an impact assessment perspective with an examination of Food Science research 2008–2018 and a random sample of 10,000 Scopus articles from 2012. The results include high correlations between citation counts from Scopus and Dimensions (0.96 by narrow field in 2012) as well as similar average counts. Almost all Scopus articles with DOIs were found in Dimensions (97% in 2012). Thus, the scholarly database component of Dimensions seems to be a plausible alternative to Scopus and the Web of Science for general citation analyses and for citation data in support of some types of research evaluations. 相似文献
4.
对 Scopus 数据库中的83种图书情报学期刊的零被引现象进行了实证研究。通过从期刊零被引论文分布、统计当年前三年的零被引论文数量与可引用论文数量等指标的相关系数两个方面进行分析发现：随着时间变化,期刊整体的零被引论文数量在不断下降,但是较为稳定的状态;大部分期刊的零被引论文数量与其发文量和可被引论文数量成正相关,少数期刊的相关性不强;零被引论文数量与篇均被引、自引论文数量、总被引次数等指标间整体上的相关性较低,甚至是负相关。 相似文献
5.
目的：比较SCIE、Scopus与SciFinder的收录范围、检索结果与引证关系。方法：对3个数据库的基本信息、引证分析功能,以及从关键词、机构与期刊名称3个字段进行实例检索得到的结果进行对比分析。结果：SCIE入选期刊最严格,Scopus收录期刊最多,SciFinder文献类型最全面。结论：SciFinder作为专业检索数据库,检索课题更全面,对检索结果的处理功能更强大。SCIE和Scopus更侧重期刊评价和引文分析,方便特定课题的溯源与追踪,也是写作和投稿很好的参考工具。 相似文献
6.
【目的】 通过文献计量分析法筛选资源环境学科“一带一路”专题,解决传统选题策划与读者预期有偏差、无法精准吻合学科发展热点的问题。【方法】 采用TF-IDF和文献互引聚类综合分析法,选取以“一带一路”为 相似文献
7.
《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(3):147-153
ABSTRACT Scopus is a new all-science abstracting and indexing (A&I) database. It is the result of a two-year collaboration with librarians and researchers from all over the world. Scopus covers over 14,000 scientific, technical, medical and social science titles from 4,000 publishers. It offers new sorting and refining features so that researchers can easily find and access more than 27 million abstracts and citations stretching back to the mid-1960s. This article recounts the development of Scopus from its inception in 2002 to its success in securing over 100 customers within weeks of its recent launch. The story is told by one of the librarians heavily involved in testing and shaping the product and by one of the Product Managers who built it. 相似文献
8.
This article presents the results of a comparative study of Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and Google Scholar (GS) for a set of 15 business and economics journals. Citations from the three sources were analyzed to determine whether one source is better than another, or whether a new database such as Scopus, or a free database such as GS could replace WoS. The authors concluded that scholars might want to use alternative tools collectively to get a more complete picture of the scholarly impact of an article. 相似文献
9.
Scopus and Web of Science are the two major citation databases that collect and disseminate bibliometric statistics about research articles, journals, institutions, and individual authors. Liaison librarians are now regularly called upon to utilize these databases to assist faculty in finding citation activity on their published works for tenure and promotion, grant applications, and more. But questions about the accuracy, scope, and coverage of these tools deserve closer scrutiny. Discrepancies in citation capture led to a systematic study on how Scopus and Web of Science compared in a real-life situation encountered by liaisons: comparing three different disciplines at a medical school and nursing program. How many articles would each database retrieve for each faculty member using the author-searching tools provided? How many cited references for each faculty member would each tool generate? Results demonstrated troubling differences in publication and citation activity capture between Scopus and Web of Science. Implications for librarians are discussed. 相似文献
10.