Cited by 21scientometrics and bibliometrics researchWeb visibility and informetricsPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

Missing Documents in Scopus: The Case of the Journal Enfermeria Nefrologica

Krauskopf, Erwin·2019·Scientometrics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11192-019-03040-z

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • WoS and Scopus have specific deficiencies including inconsistencies of journal coverage, inaccuracy of subject classification schemes, missing citation information or citation links, incorrect and missing DOI numbers, duplicate entries, and inconsistent publication dates.

    “Meanwhile, other authors discussed more specific deficiencies of the DBs, such as inconsistencies of journal coverage [63], the accuracy of subject classification schemes [64], missing citation information or citation links [40,65,66], incorrect and missing DOI numbers [53,67-69], duplicate entries [30], and inconsistent publication dates [53].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krauskopf, E.
Affiliations
Universidad Andrés Bello (CL)
Corresponding author
Krauskopf, Erwin
Venue
Scientometrics
Published
2019-03-09
Volume
119
Issue
1
Pages
543-547
ISSN
  • 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2861
OpenAlex
W2921286186
Cited by
21
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Proyecto Financiamiento Basal (AFB170004)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › 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, missing documents, bibliometric indicators, citation analysis, publication frequency, journal indexing

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