The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“However, although the share of conference proceedings articles in Scopus and in WoS is statistically similar (approximately 10%) [52], the majority of studies determined better coverage of conference material in Scopus when compared to WoS [26,39,53,55,57,59].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“Meanwhile, the content coverage of Russian scientific literature was determined to be growing even exponentially, especially in Scopus, although higher growth rates in the coverage of conference material were determined in WoS, when compared to Scopus [52].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“Serial conference proceedings were shown to be highly overlapping between the DBs [40,52].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“during 2006-2016 period the share of papers in Russian-language journals in Scopus increased from 4.8% to 14.8%, while, in WoS, this percentage declined from 6.5% to 3.0% during the same period [52].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“The different conclusions that were drawn from these studies may be related to the differences in the applied time frames, because, while the total number of publications in the DBs is growing steadily, the increase of non-English documents may be more volatile, especially due to the execution of content expansion programs that were focused on specific source types or regions [52].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
In the citing paper
“the amounts of certain type publications in WoS may be overestimated, as WoS assigns conference papers published in regular journals as both articles and conference papers”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [52]
Citations
Cites
van Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2001) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1010549719484 · Cited by 433
Self-citationvan Raan, A. F. J. (2004) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_2 · Cited by 279
Empirical Analysis and Classification of Database Errors in Scopus and Web of Science
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.07.003 · Cited by 225
What Have We Learned About Science and Technology from the Russian Experience?
Graham, L. R. (1998) · Stanford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781503616639 · Cited by 164
Applied Evaluative Informetrics
Moed, H. F. (2017) · Qualitative and quantitative analysis of scientific and scholarly communication · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60522-7 · Cited by 153
Self-citationWhat have we learned about science and technology from the Russian experience?
Graham, L. R. (1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.36-1542 · Cited by 123
BRICS countries and scientific excellence: A bibliometric analysis of most frequently cited papers
Bornmann, L., Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23333 · Cited by 122
Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: an analysis of international coauthorship
Finardi, U., & Buratti, A. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1927-0 · Cited by 79
Wilson, C. S., & Markusova, V. A. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018539.93567.d8 · Cited by 54
Self-citationInfluence of the program “5–top 100” on the publication activity of Russian universities
Turko, T. I., Bakhturin, G., Bagan, V. A., Poloskov, S. S., & Gudym, D. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2060-9 · Cited by 50
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- CSAB. (n.d.). https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content/scopus-content-selection-and-advisory-board . Last Retrieved 8 January 2018.
- Elsevier. (n.d.). https://www.elsevier.com/?a=212275 . Last Retrieved 30 March 2018.
- Mindeli, L. (2013) (ed.). Russian Academy of Sciences in numbers (2013). Statistical issue. IPRAN RAS, Moscow.
- Neicon. (2017). The 5th NEICON international conference “electronic resources for research and education: Development, promotion and use”. Jesolo, Italy, 25 Sept–1 Oct 2017.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World
Pranckutė, R. (2021) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications9010012 · Cited by 2,696
A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers
Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8 · Cited by 1,556
Web of Science and Scopus Language Coverage
Vera-Baceta, M.-A., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z · Cited by 423
A big picture: bibliometric study of academic publications from post-Soviet countries
Chankseliani, M., Lovakov, A. V., & Pislyakov, V. V. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04124-5 · Cited by 97
Prevalence of potentially predatory publishing in Scopus on the country level
Marina, T., & Андреевич, С. И. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-03899-x · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Moed, H. F., Markusova, V., & Akoev, M.
- Affiliations
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Russian Academy of Sciences (RU)
- Ural Federal University (RU)
- Corresponding author
- Moed, Henk F.
- Markusova, Valentina
- Akoev, Mark
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2018-05-11
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1153-1180
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W2799340358
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 11.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- elar.urfu.ru
- Licence
- other-oa
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
- Electronic Archive of Ural Federal University (ELAR UrFU) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Russian Foundation of Basic Research (17-02-00157)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- Scopus, Web of Science, bibliographic database coverage, Project 5-100, research performance indicators, internationalization of research, publication trends, document types, language of publication, academic disciplines
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
