Cited by 253scientometrics and bibliometrics researchLibrary Science and InformationWeb visibility and informetrics

The Application of Bibliometric Analysis: Disciplinary and User Aspects

Open access
Ellegaard, Ole·2018·Scientometrics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11192-018-2765-z

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Ellegaard, O.
Affiliations
University of Southern Denmark (DK)
Corresponding author
Ellegaard, Ole
Venue
Scientometrics
Published
2018-05-04
Volume
116
Issue
1
Pages
181-202
ISSN
  • 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2861
OpenAlex
W2773943570
Cited by
253
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
Keywords
bibliometric analysis, library and information science, disciplinary differences, citation patterns, keyword co-occurrence, citation impact, interdisciplinary research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review