Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in nursing

被引:112
作者
De Groote, Sandra L. [1 ]
Raszewski, Rebecca [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Univ Lib, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Lib Hlth Sci Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
关键词
h-index; CINAHL; Scopus; Web of Science; Google Scholar; Nursing research; CITATION; PROS; CONS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.outlook.2012.04.007
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Purpose: This study compares the articles cited in CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Google Scholar and the h-index ratings provided by Scopus, WOS, and Google Scholar. Methods: The publications of 30 College of Nursing faculty at a large urban university were examined. Searches by author name were executed in Scopus, WOS, and POP (Publish or Perish, which searches Google Scholar), and the h-index for each author from each database was recorded. In addition, the citing articles of their published articles were imported into a bibliographic management program. This data was used to determine an aggregated h-index for each author. Results: Scopus, WOS, and Google Scholar provided different h-index ratings for authors and each database found unique and duplicate citing references. Conclusions: More than one tool should be used to calculate the h-index for nursing faculty because one tool alone cannot be relied on to provide a thorough assessment of a researcher's impact. If researchers are interested in a comprehensive h-index, they should aggregate the citing references located by WOS and Scopus. Because h-index rankings differ among databases, comparisons between researchers should be done only within a specified database. Cite this article: De Groote, S.L., & Raszewski, R. (2012, DECEMBER). Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in nursing. Nursing Outlook, 60(6), 391-400. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2012.04.007.
引用
收藏
页码:391 / 400
页数:10
相关论文
共 30 条
[21]  
Kulkarni A., J AM MED ASS, V302, P1092
[22]   Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar [J].
Meho, Lokman I. ;
Yang, Kiduk .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2007, 58 (13) :2105-2125
[23]   Impact factors in nursing journals [J].
Polit, Denise F. ;
Northam, Sally .
NURSING OUTLOOK, 2011, 59 (01) :18-28
[24]  
Scopus, 2012, FAQS
[25]  
The Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process, 2012, PROD SERV J SEL PROC
[26]   Guest Editorial: h-indices and the performance of professors of nursing in the UK [J].
Thompson, David R. ;
Watson, Roger .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2010, 19 (21-22) :2957-2958
[27]  
Thomson Reuters, 2012, COMPL RES PICT
[28]  
Ulrichsweb/Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, 2011, SER SOL
[29]   A new look at evidence of scholarly citation in citation indexes and from web sources [J].
Vaughan, Liwen ;
Shaw, Debora .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2008, 74 (02) :317-330
[30]  
Web of Science, 2011, PROD SERV WEB SCI