Research Article: “Large-Scale Comparison of Bibliographic Data Sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic” (Preprint)

UPDATE: Feb 1, 2021: An uncorrected proof version of this paper is now available online from Quantitative Science Studies (QSS).

–End Update–

The following research preprint was recently shared on arXiv.

Title

Large-Scale Comparison of Bibliographic Data Sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, CrossRef, and Microsoft Academic

Authors

Martijn Visser
Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University

Nees Jan van Eck
Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University

Ludo Waltman
Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University

Source

via arXiv

Abstract

We present a large-scale comparison of five multidisciplinary bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. The comparison considers all scientific documents from the period 2008-2017 covered by these data sources. Scopus is compared in a pairwise manner with each of the other data sources. We first analyze differences between the data sources in the coverage of documents, focusing for instance on differences over time, differences per document type, and differences per discipline. We then study differences in the completeness and accuracy of citation links. Based on our analysis, we discuss strengths and weaknesses of the different data sources. We emphasize the importance of combining a comprehensive coverage of the scientific literature with a flexible set of filters for making selections of the literature.’

Direct to Full Text Article
29 pages; PDF.