IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i7d10.1007_s11192-024-05034-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The indexation of retracted literature in seven principal scholarly databases: a coverage comparison of dimensions, OpenAlex, PubMed, Scilit, Scopus, The Lens and Web of Science

Author

Listed:
  • José Luis Ortega

    (Institute for Advanced Social Studies (IESA-CSIC))

  • Lorena Delgado-Quirós

    (Joint Research Unit Knowledge Transfer and Innovation, (UCO-CSIC))

Abstract

In this study, the coverage and overlap of retracted publications, retraction notices and withdrawals are compared across seven significant scholarly databases, with the aim to check for discrepancies, pinpoint the causes of those discrepancies, and choose the best product to produce the most accurate picture of retracted literature. Seven scholarly databases were searched to obtain all the retracted publications, retraction notices and withdrawal from 2000. Only web search interfaces were used, excepting in OpenAlex and Scilit. The findings demonstrate that non-selective databases (Dimensions, OpenAlex, Scilit, and The Lens) index a greater amount of retracted literature than do databases that rely their indexation on venue selection (PubMed, Scopus, and WoS). The key factors explaining these discrepancies are the indexation of withdrawals and proceeding articles. Additionally, the high coverage of OpenAlex and Scilit could be explained by the inaccurate labeling of retracted documents in Scopus, Dimensions, and The Lens. 99% of the sample is jointly covered by OpenAlex, Scilit and WoS. The study suggests that research on retracted literature would require querying more than one source and that it should be advisable to accurately identify and label this literature in academic databases.

Suggested Citation

  • José Luis Ortega & Lorena Delgado-Quirós, 2024. "The indexation of retracted literature in seven principal scholarly databases: a coverage comparison of dimensions, OpenAlex, PubMed, Scilit, Scopus, The Lens and Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 3769-3785, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:7:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05034-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05034-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05034-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-05034-y?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2020. "Reform retractions to make them more transparent," Nature, Nature, vol. 582(7811), pages 149-149, June.
    2. Marion Schmidt, 2018. "An analysis of the validity of retraction annotation in pubmed and the web of science," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(2), pages 318-328, February.
    3. Bakthavachalam Elango & Marcin Kozak & Periyaswamy Rajendran, 2019. "Analysis of retractions in Indian science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1081-1094, May.
    4. M. K. Yanti Idaya Aspura & A. Noorhidawati & A. Abrizah, 2018. "An analysis of Malaysian retracted papers: Misconduct or mistakes?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1315-1328, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Qin Zhang & Juneman Abraham & Hui-Zhen Fu, 2020. "Collaboration and its influence on retraction based on retracted publications during 1978–2017," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 213-232, October.
    2. Behzad Gholampour & Sajad Gholampour & Alireza Noruzi & Clément Arsenault & Thomas Haertlé & Ali Akbar Saboury, 2022. "Retracted articles in oncology in the last three decades: frequency, reasons, and themes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1841-1865, April.
    3. Bakthavachalam Elango, 2021. "Retracted articles in the biomedical literature from Indian authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3965-3981, May.
    4. Bakthavachalam Elango, 2022. "Characteristics of retracted editorial articles in the biomedical literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1431-1438, March.
    5. Shenghui Li & Wenyan Xu & Jingqi Yin, 2023. "Cross-cultural differences in retracted publications of male and female from a global perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 3805-3826, July.
    6. Tariq Ahmad Shah & Sumeer Gul & Saimah Bashir & Suhail Ahmad & Assumpció Huertas & Andrea Oliveira & Farzana Gulzar & Ashaq Hussain Najar & Kanu Chakraborty, 2021. "Influence of accessibility (open and toll-based) of scholarly publications on retractions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4589-4606, June.
    7. Ali Ghorbi & Mohsen Fazeli-Varzaneh & Erfan Ghaderi-Azad & Marcel Ausloos & Marcin Kozak, 2021. "Retracted papers by Iranian authors: causes, journals, time lags, affiliations, collaborations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7351-7371, September.
    8. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Huyen Thanh T. Nguyen & Thanh-Hang Pham & Manh-Toan Ho & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2021. "Assessing the ideological homogeneity in entrepreneurial finance research by highly cited publications," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2020. "Book Review of Alexandros Gasparatos and Katherine J. Willis. Biodiversity in the Green Economy. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2015. Version 1," OSF Preprints 3xhrg, Center for Open Science.
    10. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2020. "The third finding concerning a missing cultural value: a bibliometric analysis using the Web of Science," OSF Preprints jbcx3, Center for Open Science.
    11. Le, Tam-Tri & Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2022. "Innovative ideas need these ‘scouts’," OSF Preprints f6qta, Center for Open Science.
    12. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Quang-Loc Nguyen & Ruining Jin & Minh-Hieu Thi Nguyen & Thi-Phuong Nguyen & Viet-Phuong La & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2023. "Increasing Supply for Woody-Biomass-Based Energy through Wasted Resources: Insights from US Private Landowners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    13. Manh-Toan Ho & Thanh-Huyen T. Nguyen & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Viet-Phuong La & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2022. "Virtual tree, real impact: how simulated worlds associate with the perception of limited resources," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    14. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2021. "Lecture 1: Phân tích dữ liệu xã hội sử dụng BMF, MCMC và bayesvl với ngôn ngữ R," OSF Preprints s9rq7, Center for Open Science.
    15. Manh-Toan Ho & Ngoc-Thang B. Le & Manh-Tung Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2022. "A bibliometric review on development economics research in Vietnam from 2008 to 2020," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 2939-2969, October.
    16. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2020. "The fourth finding concerning a missing cultural value: a bibliometric analysis on water pollution," OSF Preprints 6fzsd, Center for Open Science.
    17. Tam-Tri Le & Ruining Jin & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2024. "Fair but Irresponsible: How Moral Senses Affect Young Males’ Attitudes Toward Extramarital Affairs," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, July.
    18. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Thomas E. Jones, 2022. "Building eco-surplus culture among urban residents as a novel strategy to improve finance for conservation in protected areas," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Nguyen, Thuy & Ngo, Cong-Thang & Pham, Thi Hong-Diep & Nguyen, Thi Huong-Lan & Nguyen, Thi-Hong & Khuc, Quy Van, 2021. "To what extent people perceive and accept COVID-19 vaccines in Nghe An province," OSF Preprints uw85r, Center for Open Science.
    20. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Quy Van Khuc & Viet-Phuong La & Tam-Tri Le & Quang-Loc Nguyen & Ruining Jin & Phuong-Tri Nguyen & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2022. "Mindsponge-Based Reasoning of Households’ Financial Resilience during the COVID-19 Crisis," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, November.

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:7:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05034-y. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.