Cited by 488scientometrics and bibliometrics researchWeb visibility and informetricsLibrary Science and Information

Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature

Halevi, Gali, Moed, Henk, Bar-Ilan, Judit·2017·Journal of Informetrics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.005

Cites

76 of 76 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Halevi, G., Moed, H., & Bar-Ilan, J.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Corresponding author
Halevi, Gali
Venue
Journal of Informetrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
823-834
ISSN
1751-1577 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2730123083
Cited by
488
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 6
FWCI
25.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Informetrics (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 › Web visibility and informetrics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
Keywords
Google Scholar, bibliographic databases, Web of Science, Scopus, citation counts, bibliometric indicators, database coverage, indexing quality, citation manipulation, 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