Accuracy of Funding Information in Scopus: A Comparative Case Study
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
WoS performs much better than Scopus in both coverage and accuracy of funding information.
“the most recent comparative studies between WoS and Scopus have shown that WoS performs much better than Scopus in both coverage and accuracy of FI [79,80].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [79]
The recall of funding information in Scopus was estimated at approximately 67%.
“the recall of FI in Scopus was estimated being only approximately 67% [79].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [79]
Scopus funding information suffers from the same and even greater deficiencies as WoS funding information.
“Meanwhile, Scopus FI was not investigated as extensively as in the case of WoS, but it was shown that Scopus funding information suffers from the same and even greater deficiencies [79].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [79]
Both WoS and Scopus are not immune to errors in publication metadata.
“Despite being globally acknowledged as the most comprehensive data sources, both WoS and Scopus are not immune to errors that occur in publication metadata.”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [79]
The distributions of errors between WoS and Scopus are very different, with one error being more frequent in one DB, and others in the other DB.
“Generally, the distributions of errors between WoS and Scopus are very different, with one error being more frequent in one DB, and others, in the other DB [62,66,79,95].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [79]
Cites
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00019 · Cited by 2,093 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Self-citationWang, J., & Philip Shapira, A. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0362-5 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D. A., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.006 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Paul-Hus, A., Desrochers, N., & Costas, R. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1953-y · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Kokol, P., & Blažun Vošner, H. (2018) · Journal of the Medical Library Association · doi:10.5195/jmla.2018.181 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Yan, E., Wu, C., & Song, M. (2017) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2583-8 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller E uropean countries
Gök, A., Rigby, J., & Philip Shapira, A. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23406 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Funding Information in Web of Science: An Updated Overview
Liu, W., Tang, L., & Hu, G. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03362-3 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Self-citationFunding Acknowledgment Analysis: Queries and Caveats
Tang, L., Hu, G., & Liu, W. (2017) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23713 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Self-citationFunding Data from Publication Acknowledgments: Coverage, Uses, and Limitations
Grassano, N., Rotolo, D., Hutton, J., Lang, F., & Hopkins, M. M. (2017) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23737 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Funding Acknowledgments in the Web of Science: Completeness and Accuracy of Collected Data
Álvarez-Bornstein, B., Morillo, F., & Bordons, M. (2017) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2453-4 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Missing Author Address Information in Web of Science—An Explorative Study
Liu, W., Hu, G., & Tang, L. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.07.008 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Self-citationDOI errors and possible solutions for Web of Science
Zhu, J., Hu, G., & Liu, W. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2980-7 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationTypes of DOI errors of cited references in Web of Science with a cleaning method
Xu, S., Hao, L., An, X., Zhai, D., & Pang, H. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03162-4 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Missing author address information in Web of Science—An explorative study
Liu, W., Hu, G., & Tang, L. (2018) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Self-citationMissing Documents in Scopus: The Case of the Journal Enfermeria Nefrologica
Krauskopf, E. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03040-z · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Morillo, F., & Álvarez-Bornstein, B. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2947-8 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
The Secrets behind Web of Science’s DOI Search
Zhu, J., Liu, F., & Liu, W. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03091-2 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
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 · see citing works
Trend of Polymer Research Related to COVID-19 Pandemic: Bibliometric Analysis
Chiari, W., Damayanti, R., Harapan, H., Puspita, K., Saiful, S., Rahmi, R., Rizki, D. R., & Iqhrammullah, M. (2022) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym14163297 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Liu, W.
- Affiliations
- Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Weishu
- ORCID
- Liu, Weishu
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2020-04-11
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 803-811
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W3015863150
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 4.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
- 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 Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
- Keywords
- Scopus, Web of Science, funding information, data quality, bibliographic databases, funding acknowledgment, research evaluation
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
