IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v19y2025i1s1751157724001305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citation counts and inclusion of references in seven free-access scholarly databases: A comparative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Delgado-Quirós, Lorena
  • Ortega, José Luis

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine disparities in citation counts amongst scholarly databases and the reasons that contribute to these differences. A random Crossref sample of >115k DOIs was selected and subsequently searched across six databases (Dimensions, Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scilit, Semantic Scholar and The Lens). In July 2021, citation counts and lists of references were extracted from each database for comparative processing and analysis. The findings indicate that publications in Crossref-based databases (Crossref, Dimensions, Scilit and The Lens) have similar citation counts, while documents in search engines (Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic and Semantic Scholar) have a higher number of citations due to a greater coverage of publications, but also to the integration of web copies. Analysis of references has revealed that Scilit only extracts references with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) and that Semantic Scholar causes significant problems when it adds references from external web versions. Ultimately, the study has shown that all the databases struggle to index references from books and book chapters, which may be attributable to certain academic publishers. The study concludes with a discussion of the potential effects on research evaluation that may arise from this lack of citations.

Suggested Citation

  • Delgado-Quirós, Lorena & Ortega, José Luis, 2025. "Citation counts and inclusion of references in seven free-access scholarly databases: A comparative analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:1:s1751157724001305
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2024.101618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157724001305
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101618?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:1:s1751157724001305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.