Gaps in affiliation indexing in Scopus and PubMed.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
The authors sought to determine whether unexpected gaps existed in Scopus's author affiliation indexing of publications written by the University of Nebraska Medical Center or Nebraska Medicine (UNMC/NM) authors during 2014.Methods
First, we compared Scopus affiliation identifier search results to PubMed affiliation keyword search results. Then, we searched Scopus using affiliation keywords (UNMC, etc.) and compared the results to PubMed affiliation keyword and Scopus affiliation identifier searches.Results
We found that Scopus's records for approximately 7% of UNMC/NM authors' publications lacked appropriate UNMC/NM author affiliation identifiers, and many journals' publishers were supplying incomplete author affiliation information to PubMed.Conclusions
Institutions relying on Scopus to track their impact should determine whether Scopus's affiliation identifiers will, in fact, identify all articles published by their authors and investigators.
SUBMITTER: Schmidt CM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4816483 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Gaps in affiliation indexing in Scopus and PubMed.
Schmidt Cynthia M CM Cox Roxanne R Fial Alissa V AV Hartman Teresa L TL Magee Martha L ML
Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20160401 2
<h4>Objective</h4>The authors sought to determine whether unexpected gaps existed in Scopus's author affiliation indexing of publications written by the University of Nebraska Medical Center or Nebraska Medicine (UNMC/NM) authors during 2014.<h4>Methods</h4>First, we compared Scopus affiliation identifier search results to PubMed affiliation keyword search results. Then, we searched Scopus using affiliation keywords (UNMC, etc.) and compared the results to PubMed affiliation keyword and Scopus a ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeArthroscopy is an established sub-speciality in orthopaedics. With advancing technology, instrumentation and implants, this sub-speciality has seen an explosion of knowledge and techniques since its inception. The indications for arthroscopic management are increasing and, hence, the number of publications on this topic. There has been no study looking into the bibliometrics of all publications within this speciality. The purpose of this study was to look into the trends of published articles on arthroscopy from PubMed and Scopus including studying their citation numbers.Materials and methodsWe set out to look into the number of publications from the earliest up to 2019 and their trends and citation numbers in PubMed and Scopus. We also performed a VOS viewer analysis of MeSH terms and titles of publications to look at research trends over time.ResultsThere were 41,149 articles published on PubMed since 1955 and 50,373 articles on Scopus since 1939. The total number of citations were 912,630 for 38,338 cited articles. With 2864 publications in 2019, there was a more than four-fold increase from the number published in the year 2000. The knee joint was the most frequently published joint with an increasing trend in hip arthroscopy. Cohort studies were the most common with 13,180 articles followed by Reviews with 5746 articles. The top 10 authors, universities and journals were listed along with citation numbers. We analysed the trends of publications for each joint and compared them. Yearly citations have progressively increased to reach a maximum of 45,407 in 2007. Arthroscopy was the most published and cited journal on this topic. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) (Am) had the most citations per article. The USA and Hospital for Special Surgery, New York were the most published country and university, respectively.ConclusionsThere is a healthy growth of publications on the subject of arthroscopy with a steep increase in the number of publications and citations in recent years. VOS Viewer analysis showed an evolution of research and practice in the field of arthroscopy. Recommendations were made for databases and search engines to improve on the search and analysis of such studies in the future.Level of evidence4.
| S-EPMC8082866 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledHigh-throughput genomic technologies enable researchers to identify genes that are co-regulated with respect to specific experimental conditions. Numerous statistical approaches have been developed to identify differentially expressed genes. Because each approach can produce distinct gene sets, it is difficult for biologists to determine which statistical approach yields biologically relevant gene sets and is appropriate for their study. To address this issue, we implemented Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) to determine the functional coherence of gene sets. An LSI model was built using over 1 million Medline abstracts for over 20,000 mouse and human genes annotated in Entrez Gene. The gene-to-gene LSI-derived similarities were used to calculate a literature cohesion p-value (LPv) for a given gene set using a Fisher's exact test. We tested this method against genes in more than 6,000 functional pathways annotated in Gene Ontology (GO) and found that approximately 75% of gene sets in GO biological process category and 90% of the gene sets in GO molecular function and cellular component categories were functionally cohesive (LPv<0.05). These results indicate that the LPv methodology is both robust and accurate. Application of this method to previously published microarray datasets demonstrated that LPv can be helpful in selecting the appropriate feature extraction methods. To enable real-time calculation of LPv for mouse or human gene sets, we developed a web tool called Gene-set Cohesion Analysis Tool (GCAT). GCAT can complement other gene set enrichment approaches by determining the overall functional cohesion of data sets, taking into account both explicit and implicit gene interactions reported in the biomedical literature.AvailabilityGCAT is freely available at http://binf1.memphis.edu/gcat.
| S-EPMC3077411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Identification of transcription factors (TFs) responsible for modulation of differentially expressed genes is a key step in deducing gene regulatory pathways. Most current methods identify TFs by searching for presence of DNA binding motifs in the promoter regions of co-regulated genes. However, this strategy may not always be useful as presence of a motif does not necessarily imply a regulatory role. Conversely, motif presence may not be required for a TF to regulate a set of genes. Therefore, it is imperative to include functional (biochemical and molecular) associations, such as those found in the biomedical literature, into algorithms for identification of putative regulatory TFs that might be explicitly or implicitly linked to the genes under investigation.In this study, we present a Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) based text mining approach for identification and ranking of putative regulatory TFs from microarray derived differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Two LSI models were built using different term weighting schemes to devise pair-wise similarities between 21,027 mouse genes annotated in the Entrez Gene repository. Amongst these genes, 433 were designated TFs in the TRANSFAC database. The LSI derived TF-to-gene similarities were used to calculate TF literature enrichment p-values and rank the TFs for a given set of genes. We evaluated our approach using five different publicly available microarray datasets focusing on TFs Rel, Stat6, Ddit3, Stat5 and Nfic. In addition, for each of the datasets, we constructed gold standard TFs known to be functionally relevant to the study in question. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves showed that the log-entropy LSI model outperformed the tf-normal LSI model and a benchmark co-occurrence based method for four out of five datasets, as well as motif searching approaches, in identifying putative TFs.Our results suggest that our LSI based text mining approach can complement existing approaches used in systems biology research to decipher gene regulatory networks by providing putative lists of ranked TFs that might be explicitly or implicitly associated with sets of DEGs derived from microarray experiments. In addition, unlike motif searching approaches, LSI based approaches can reveal TFs that may indirectly regulate genes.
| S-EPMC3236841 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundLabels are a way to add some information on a text, such as functional annotations such as genes on a DNA sequences. V(D)J recombinations are DNA recombinations involving two or three short genes in lymphocytes. Sequencing this short region (500 bp or less) produces labeled sequences and brings insight in the lymphocyte repertoire for onco-hematology or immunology studies.MethodsWe present two indexes for a text with non-overlapping labels. They store the text in a Burrows-Wheeler transform (BWT) and a compressed label sequence in a Wavelet Tree. The label sequence is taken in the order of the text (TL-index) or in the order of the BWT (TLBW-index). Both indexes need a space related to the entropy of the labeled text.ResultsThese indexes allow efficient text-label queries to count and find labeled patterns. The TLBW-index has an overhead on simple label queries but is very efficient on combined pattern-label queries. We implemented the indexes in C++ and compared them against a baseline solution on pseudo-random as well as on V(D)J labeled texts.DiscussionNew indexes such as the ones we proposed improve the way we index and query labeled texts as, for instance, lymphocyte repertoire for hematological and immunological studies.
| S-EPMC7924554 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Modeling distributions of citations to scientific papers is crucial for understanding how science develops. However, there is a considerable empirical controversy on which statistical model fits the citation distributions best. This paper is concerned with rigorous empirical detection of power-law behaviour in the distribution of citations received by the most highly cited scientific papers. We have used a large, novel data set on citations to scientific papers published between 1998 and 2002 drawn from Scopus. The power-law model is compared with a number of alternative models using a likelihood ratio test. We have found that the power-law hypothesis is rejected for around half of the Scopus fields of science. For these fields of science, the Yule, power-law with exponential cut-off and log-normal distributions seem to fit the data better than the pure power-law model. On the other hand, when the power-law hypothesis is not rejected, it is usually empirically indistinguishable from most of the alternative models. The pure power-law model seems to be the best model only for the most highly cited papers in "Physics and Astronomy". Overall, our results seem to support theories implying that the most highly cited scientific papers follow the Yule, power-law with exponential cut-off or log-normal distribution. Our findings suggest also that power laws in citation distributions, when present, account only for a very small fraction of the published papers (less than 1 % for most of science fields) and that the power-law scaling parameter (exponent) is substantially higher (from around 3.2 to around 4.7) than found in the older literature.
| S-EPMC4365275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It is essential to evaluate the impact of scientific publications through citation analysis in citation indexes. In addition, scientometric measures of social media also should be assessed. These measures include how many times the publications were read, viewed, and downloaded. The present study aimed to assess the scientific output of scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014 based on scientometric measures of Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley.A survey method was used to study the articles published in Scopus journals by scholars at Kashan University of Medical Sciences by the end of March 2014. The required data were collected from Scopus, ResearchGate, and Mendeley. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Also, the Spearman correlation was used between the number of views of articles in ResearchGate with citation number of the articles in Scopus and reading frequency of the articles in Mendeley with citation number in Scopus were examined using the Spearman correlation in SPSS 16.Five-hundred and thirty-three articles were indexed in the Scopus Citation Database by the end of March 2014. Collectively, those articles were cited 1,315 times. The articles were covered by ResearchGate (74%) more than Mendeley (44%). In addition, 98% of the articles indexed in ResearchGate and 92% of the articles indexed in Mendeley were viewed at least once. The results showed that there was a positive correlation between the number of views of the articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley and the number of citations of the articles in Scopus.Coverage and the number of visitors were higher in ResearchGate than in Mendeley. The increase in the number of views of articles in ResearchGate and Mendeley also increased the number of citations of the papers. Social networks, such as ResearchGate and Mendeley, also can be used as tools for the evaluation of academics and scholars based on the scientific research they have conducted.
| S-EPMC4821323 | biostudies-other
Project description:An editorial expression of concern (EEoC) is issued by editors or publishers to draw attention to potential problems in a publication, without itself constituting a retraction or correction. We searched PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Google Scholar to identify EEoCs issued for publications in PubMed and PMC up to 22 August 2016. We also searched the archives of the Retraction Watch blog, some journal and publisher websites, and studies of EEoCs. In addition, we searched for retractions of EEoCs and affected articles in PubMed up to 8 December 2016. We analyzed overall historical trends, as well as reported reasons and subsequent editorial actions related to EEoCs issued between August 2014 and August 2016. After screening 5,076 records, we identified 230 EEoCs that affect 300 publications indexed in PubMed, the earliest issued in 1985. Half of the primary EEoCs were issued between 2014 and 2016 (52%). We found evidence of some EEoCs that had been removed by the publisher without leaving a record and some were not submitted for PubMed or PMC indexing. A minority of publications affected by EEoCs had been retracted by early December 2016 (25%). For the subset of 92 EEoCs issued between August 2014 and August 2016, affecting 99 publications, the rate of retraction was similar (29%). The majority of EEoCs were issued because of concerns with validity of data, methods, or interpretation of the publication (68%), and 31% of cases remained open. Issues with images were raised in 40% of affected publications. Ongoing monitoring after the study identified another 17 EEoCs to year's end in 2016, increasing the number of EEoCs to 247 and publications in PubMed known to be affected by EEoCs to 320 at the end of 2016. EEoCs have been rare publishing events in the biomedical literature, but their use has been increasing. Most have not led to retractions, and many remain unresolved. Lack of prominence and inconsistencies in management of EEoCs reduce the ability of these notices to alert the scientific community to potentially serious problems in publications. EEoCs will be made identifiable in PubMed in 2017.
| S-EPMC5526611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic has generated thousands of articles and news items. However, finding relevant scientific articles in such rapidly developing health crises is a major challenge which, in turn, can affect decision-makers' ability to utilise up-to-date findings and ultimately shape public health interventions. This study set out to show the impact that the inconsistent naming of the pandemic can have on retrieving relevant scientific articles in PubMed/MEDLINE.MethodologyWe first formulated a PubMed search algorithm covering different names of the influenza pandemic and simulated the results that it would have retrieved from weekly searches for relevant new records during the first 10 weeks of the pandemic. To assess the impact of failing to include every term in this search, we then conducted the same searches but omitted in turn "h1n1," "swine," "influenza" and "flu" from the search string, and compared the results to those for the full string.Principal findingsOn average, our core search string identified 44.3 potentially relevant new records at the end of each week. Of these, we determined that an average of 27.8 records were relevant. When we excluded one term from the string, the percentage of records missed out of the total number of relevant records averaged 18.7% for omitting "h1n1," 13.6% for "swine," 17.5% for "influenza," and 20.6% for "flu."ConclusionsDue to inconsistent naming, while searching for scientific material about rapidly evolving situations such as the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, there is a risk that one will miss relevant articles. To address this problem, the international scientific community should agree on nomenclature and the specific name to be used earlier, and the National Library of Medicine in the US could index potentially relevant materials faster and allow publishers to add alert tags to such materials.
| S-EPMC2850925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PubMed® is an essential resource for the medical domain, but useful concepts are either difficult to extract or are ambiguous, which has significantly hindered knowledge discovery. To address this issue, we constructed a PubMed knowledge graph (PKG) by extracting bio-entities from 29 million PubMed abstracts, disambiguating author names, integrating funding data through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) ExPORTER, collecting affiliation history and educational background of authors from ORCID®, and identifying fine-grained affiliation data from MapAffil. Through the integration of these credible multi-source data, we could create connections among the bio-entities, authors, articles, affiliations, and funding. Data validation revealed that the BioBERT deep learning method of bio-entity extraction significantly outperformed the state-of-the-art models based on the F1 score (by 0.51%), with the author name disambiguation (AND) achieving an F1 score of 98.09%. PKG can trigger broader innovations, not only enabling us to measure scholarly impact, knowledge usage, and knowledge transfer, but also assisting us in profiling authors and organizations based on their connections with bio-entities.
| S-EPMC7320186 | biostudies-literature