The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Number of Scholarly Documents on the Public Web
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Google Scholar does not report the volume of citations identifiable via their search facility, although attempts have been made to estimate this that suggest between 1.8 million [3] and 100 million records [4] are identifiable.”
From The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching (2015) · cites this paper as [4]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- J Bar-Ilan, 2008, Which h-index? a comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar, Scientometrics, 74, 257, 10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y · DOI
- J Bar-Ilan, 2010, Citations to the introduction to informetrics indexed byWOS, Scopus and Google Scholar, Scientometrics, 82, 495, 10.1007/s11192-010-0185-9 · DOI
- BC Björk, 2009, Scientific journal publishing—yearly volume and open access availability, Information Research, 14, 391
- RV Noorden, 2013, Open access: The true cost of science publishing, Nature, 495, 426, 10.1038/495426a · DOI · Paper page
- S Lawrence, 1998, Searching the world wide web, Science, 280, 98, 10.1126/science.280.5360.98 · DOI
- S Lawrence, 1999, Accessibility of information on the web, Nature, 400, 107, 10.1038/21987 · DOI
- K Bharat, 1998, A technique for measuring the relative size and overlap of public web search engines, Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30, 379, 10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00127-5 · DOI
- Dobra A, Fienberg SE (2004) How large is the world wide web. Web Dynamics: 23–44. · DOI
- AZ Broder, 1997, Syntactic clustering of the web, Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 29, 1157, 10.1016/S0169-7552(97)00031-7 · DOI
- M Norris, 2008, The citation advantage of open-access articles, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1963, 10.1002/asi.20898 · DOI
- Hogg R, Tanis E (2010) Probability and Statistical Inference. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
- Y Gargouri, 2010, Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research, PloS ONE, 5, e13636, 10.1371/journal.pone.0013636 · DOI
- C Hajjem, 2005, Ten-year cross-disciplinary comparison of the growth of open access and how it increases research citation impact, IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, 28, 39
- BC Björk, 2010, Open access to the scientific journal literature: situation 2009, PloS one, 5, e11273, 10.1371/journal.pone.0011273 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching
Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Kirk, S. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138237 · Cited by 2,387
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1378 · Cited by 2,379
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators
Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,356
Gusenbauer, M. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5 · Cited by 687
A Review on Fairness in Machine Learning
Pessach, D., & Shmueli, E. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3494672 · Cited by 598
Metadata
- Authors
- Khabsa, M., & Giles, C. L.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2014-05-09
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e93949
- ISSN
- 1932-6203
- PMC
- PMC4015892
- Cited by
- 227
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
