Transcript Slide 1
| Re-evaluation of Scopus content coverage Dr. Wim Meester Head of Product Management – Scopus http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9350-3448 4th International Scientific and Practical Conference WorldClass Scientific Publication - St Petersburg, 26 May 2015 0 | Recap Scopus Scopus is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed research literature from around the world. It is for academics, government researchers and corporate R&D professionals who need a comprehensive and efficient place to search, discover and analyze research. 22,050 titles from more than 5,000 international publishers and 105 different countries Over 57 million records All content is vigorously vetted by an independent, international board of experts called the Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) More than 3,000 customers worldwide in all geographic regions 1 | 2 Curation matters Our customers demand it Our business depends on it Identify & evaluate relevant sources Select only high quality content Index in Scopus “ We use your Scopus and Ei Compendex tools to measure and reward research activity. When we discovered that some of conferences that you cover didn’t happen, we have to ask who is defrauding whom?” The re-evaluation process is essentially a rigorous housekeeping exercise designed to ensure that the journal content in Scopus meets the high standards we and our customers now demand. | 3 The “Scopus effect” A journal in biotechnology 900 800 700 600 500 Country 2 400 Other Country 1 300 200 100 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 Big increase in article output after debut in Scopus Loss of international diversity | 4 Where is the peer-review? (a journal in Energy) “Aims and scope: … is dedicated to detailed and comprehensive investigations, analyses and appropriate reviews of the interdisciplinary aspects of renewable, fossil, biomass, agricultural residues, municipal solid wastes, hydro, solar, nuclear, geothermal, wind energy sources, all energy conversion processes, hazardous emissions, environmental protection topics included experimental, analytical, industrial studies. Also included are suitable topics regarding energy education and education, the efficient energy management and use of air, water, and land resources.” An algorithm to extend the lifetime for ad hoc networks GA-HMM gene identification model for abnormal emergency based on immunology An evaluation index system on undergraduate education based on project-based theoretical theory Guanxi with government officials and organizational performance: the mediating role of lobbying Analysis of cultural connotation of bronze drinking vessels in Zhou Dynasty Mechanical analysis of tennis racket and ball during impact based on finite element method Analysis of flow signal of Chinese vowels and consonants Music emotion cognitive system and retrieval mechanism Analysis of related factors in children with behavior problems Ontology similarity measuring and ontology mapping algorithm based on MEE criterion Case investigation on rotavirus infection for lactose intolerance Outdoor space type and characteristic analysis of the kindergarten Clinical application of gastrointestinal perioperative surgery on gastrointestinal function recovery Perspective of Zhangzhen to China increasing peasants’ income Cultural dimension of musical iconology based on graph clustering Predicament faced by exotic culture in interior home space design application—Zhengzhou as an example Design on digital library user modeling based on domain ontology Research on the long-term care emend for the elderly in China Discussion on network sports group becoming a new form of physical activity in the Internet age Strategic analysis of the problems in microblog operation in college Early intervention and evaluation of high-risk infants craniocerebral injury Study on the patterns of Zhuang brocade Educational and psychological intervention in the students' positive emotions Urban music culture and cultural Trade based on J2EE Evaluation of urban basic pension insurance based on AHP Urinary tract infection bacteria distribution and drug resistance analysis Extracurricular sports lifestyle in university based on ELECTRE-II evaluation approach Study on the nursing care for kidney transplant patient with respiratory system infection | Re-evaluation of journals covered in Scopus Journal performance against average in the field: • Output • Citations (including self-citations) • Usage Publication Ethics Concerns Inform journal and opportunity to improve performance Investigation by the Scopus team Measure journal performance again Re-evaluation by the Content Selection & Advisory Board Discontinue the forward flow of the title in Scopus 5 | Methodology: re-evaluation metrics and benchmarks Metric Benchmark Explanation Self-citations 200% The journal has a self-citation rate two times higher, or more, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. Citations 50% The journal received half the number of citations, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. Impact Per Publication 50% The journal has an IPP score half or less than the average IPP score, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. Article Output 50% The journal produced half, or less, the number of articles, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. Abstract Usage 50% The journal’s abstract are used half as much, or less, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. Full Text Links 50% The journal’s full text are used half as much, or less, when compared to peer journals in its subject field. 6 | 7 | What we have done so far Measure journal performance and analyze metrics Identify publisher contact details of flagged journals Q4 2014 Create customized emails for all flagged journals Start public communication campaign about reevaluation Collect feedback Send out mailing to journals (601 emails sent) Present 8 | More information: Scopus blog and Twitter http://blog.scopus.com/ (more than 350 hits and readers are spending average 1.20 minutes) 9 | More information: Scopus info site on Elsevier.com http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/scopus/content-overview#content-policy-and-selection 10 | Initial feedback The display of the metrics is confusing Questions about the subject field in which the journal is benchmarked Decision was made to resend the mailing to all publishers with a new way of displaying the metrics and adding the metrics of all underperforming subject fields Example of improvements: • If a journal has 3 subject fields, of which 2 were underperforming in 2013, two tables with the journal’s score of the last 3 years were shared. 2012 and 2011 were added to show the journals’ quality trend 11 | Example of communication of journal scores 12 | Feedback on mailing (>100 responses so far) We have carefully gone through each and every point given in your letter and will improve our journal We do not agree with your arguments as we are a peer reviewed (…) journal We are surprised and do not see the problem What is the timeframe in which we can respond Thank you for letting us know Can you please explain the process? I’m overwhelmed and am willing to step down and have someone else take over as the Editor-in-Chief for this journal 13 | Next steps Journal performance against average in the field: • Output • Citations (including self-citations) • Usage Publication Ethics Concerns Inform journal and opportunity to improve performance Investigation by the Scopus team Measure journal performance again (end 2015 / begin 2016) Re-evaluation by the Content Selection & Advisory Board (during 2016) If negative outcome: discontinue the forward flow of the title in Scopus (next volume/year) 14 | Спасибо! Look out for more developments from Scopus @ http://blog.scopus.com/ http://twitter.com/Scopus www.elsevier.com/scopus 15