Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38027607›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

A revisit to the specification of sub-datasets and corresponding coverage timespans when using Web of Science Core Collection.

Andy Wai Kan Yeung

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Andy Wai Kan YeungOral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Applied Oral Sciences and Community Dental Care, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many papers used the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) as the data source. The work by Liu (2019, Scientometrics) revealed that only 48 % of such papers published in information science and library science journals during 2017-2018 specified which sub-datasets they used, and subsequently urged researchers to provide such information together with the corresponding coverage timespans to improve transparency and reproducibility. This work revisited this issue to reveal if the current condition has improved following Liu's recommendations. Using WOSCC, 934 bibliometric open-access papers published during 2020-2022 in non-information science and library science journals were evaluated. Of these 934 papers, 45.0 % specified the sub-datasets of WOSCC they used for data collection, and 4.8 % specified the coverage timespan(s) of corresponding sub-datasets or the overall dataset. There seemed to be no improvement in the specification of data source using WOSCC.

Indexed as

Bibliographic databaseBibliometric analysisReplication studyReproducibilityResponsible researchWeb of Science Core collection

Identifiers

PMID38027607
PMCPMC10665658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.