SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.37 número96La ciencia abierta y su relación con la innovación: una revisión bibliométricaVeinticinco años de investigación en redes sociales: evolución de temas entre 1997 y 2021 empleando el algoritmo Asignación Latente de Dirichlet índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Investigación bibliotecológica

versão On-line ISSN 2448-8321versão impressa ISSN 0187-358X

Investig. bibl vol.37 no.96 Ciudad de México Jul./Set. 2023  Epub 02-Jun-2024

https://doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2023.96.58784 

Articles

Inconsistency in the registration of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of articles on Web of Science and Scopus

Inconsistencia en el registro del Identificador de Objectos Digitales (DOI) de artículos en Web of Science y Scopus

Erwin Krauskopf* 

Mauricio Salgado** 

* Vicerrectoría de Investigación, Universidad de las Américas, Chile. Correo electrónico: ekrauskopf@udla.cl

** Centro de Estudios Públicos, Chile. Correo electrónico: msalgado@cepchile.cl


Abstract

Almost 25 years ago, the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) was implemented with the purpose of providing a unique and persistent form of document identification. As DOIs can be assigned to any object, journals rapidly adopted their use as it eases the process of identifying a specific document, thus increasing its visibility. However, while studying the impact of papers published by Chilean researchers in disciplines related to Social Sciences, Arts, and Humanities, we noticed that some journals published a considerable proportion of documents without DOIs. Thus, we questioned if this was due to a lack of DOI adoption by these journals or if it was a database processing error. Our findings indicate that while most journals have adopted the use of DOI for article-type documents, many of the Web of Science and Scopus records do not include this information. To overcome this issue, databases need to ensure the accuracy and consistency of their data, while the editorial management team of each journal ought to confirm that all the metadata from their articles has been properly registered by these databases. Undoubtedly, the use of DOI benefits all academics as it facilitates the discoverability and retrieval of the published articles.

Keywords: Digital Object Identifier; DOI; Web of Science; Scopus; Chile

Resumen

Hace aproximadamente 25 años, el Identificador de Objetos Digitales (DOI) fue implementado con el propósito de proveer una forma única y persistente de identificación de un documento. Dado que los DOIs puede ser asignados a cualquier objeto, las revistas comenzaron a adoptar su uso ya que facilita el proceso de identificación de un documento en particular, aumentando su visibilidad. Sin embargo, al analizar el impacto de artículos publicados por investigadores Chilenos en disciplinas relacionadas a las Ciencias Sociales, Artes y Humanidades, observamos que algunas revistas publicaban una proporción significativa de documentos sin DOIs. Por lo tanto, nos preguntamos si esto era consecuencia de una falta de adopción de DOI por las revistas o si era por un error de procesamiento de las bases de datos. Nuestros resultados confirman que, a pesar de que la mayoría de las revistas implementó el uso del DOI para sus artículos, varios de los registros de Web of Science y Scopus no incluyen esta información. Para resolver este problema, las bases de datos deben asegurar la precisión y consistencia de sus datos, mientras que los equipos editoriales de cada revista deben confirmar que todos los metadatos de los artículos han sido registrados apropiadamente por estas bases de datos. Sin duda, el uso del DOI beneficia a todos los académicos ya que facilita la identificación y recuperación de los artículos publicados.

Palabras Clave: Identificador de Objetos Digitales; DOI; Web of Science; Scopus; Chile

Introduction

“Publish or perish” a well-too-know axiom to academics involved in research throughout the world. In simple terms, researchers feel impelled to publish periodically to be recruited and to secure tenure or funding for their research. The fact that a high publication rate reflects academic success has led to a numbers game (Parnas, 2007) that has not only caused an increase in the quantity of worldwide publications but has also encouraged a series of misconducts (Fanelli, 2009; Hvistendahl, 2015). While in the year 2000 approximately 1.3 million publications were registered by Scopus, by the end of 2021 that number increased to approximately 3.7 million publications. Similarly, Web of Science registered approximately 1.2 million publications in the year 2000 versus 3.6 million in 2021. As the quantity of publications rises rapidly, there is a need to make one´s research visible to other academics.

Undoubtedly, the massification of the internet in the 1990s led to changes in the structure of scholarly communications. A turning point was the availability of the first graphical browser for the world-wide-web in 1994 (Haynes, 1999). Journals, which used to print issues to communicate research outcomes, began embracing the use of the World Wide Web to disseminate knowledge by establishing webpages which provided a venue to access the information that was being published. At first, access to these documents worked as expected. Nonetheless, after some years, users began encountering error messages (such as “404 not found”) when trying to access the journal´s content, which occurred when journals changed their URL (Germain, 2000). While this study established that, after a three-year period, 50% of URL citations from 31 journals could not be accessed (Germain, 2000), a later work reported that almost 17% of the URL references from all the articles published by PLoS Medicine between 2005-2007 were non-operational (Nagajara et al., 2011). Due to the dynamics of the web, several other studies also found a high proportion of URL citations that were not accessible through the web browsers (Sampath Kumar and Vinay Kumar, 2013; Vinay Kumar and Sampath Kumar, 2017; Manjunatha et al., 2020; Shanthakumari, 2021). As the URL refers to the home address of a journal, any changes in its web architecture will affect the accessibility of a particular publication (Ansorge, 2023).

The digital object identifier (commonly known as DOI), which originated in 1998, offered a way to overcome this limitation. The DOI was conceived as a persistent and unique identifier of various types of physical and electronic objects (Paskin,2005; Liu, 2021). It is managed by the International DOI Foundation, a non-profit organization that governs the federation of registration agencies (Wang et al., 2018). The DOI name consists of a case-insensitive string made up of a prefix beginning with “10.” that represents a unique naming authority and a suffix, separated by a slash, that indicates the specific object (Paskin, 2005). Among its advantages are its capability to unambiguously identify an object, providing a simple and efficient system to track a journal article. This allows other web-based tools, such as Altmetric Explorer, to track journal articles and provide alternative metrics on the use and impact of the research at an article-level. While these metrics mainly focus on activity in online environments (such as Twitter, YouTube and Wikipedia), citation data is collected from the Dimensions database and patent data is collected from IFI Claims (https://help.altmetric.com/support/solutions/articles/6000236721-patents). The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is derived from these metrics, (https://help.alt-metric.com/support/solutions/articles/6000233311-how-is-the-altmetric-attention-score-calculated-). Though various studies have shown dissimilar results regarding a correlation between AAS and citations (Cintra et al., 2018; Breuer et al., 2022; Chen and Wang., 2022; Liu y Huang, 2022), Altmetrics still provides a means to assess online conversations surrounding a research output.

Limitations in the use of traditional bibliometrics to assess disciplines related to social sciences, arts, and humanities have been widely reported. Because some research topics are generally locally or regionally orientated, the corresponding articles are published in the language of the region where the research was developed (Frandsen y Nicolaisen, 2008; Hammarfelt and Haddow, 2018). Consequently, articles published in any other language besides English may not appear in search queries performed in either of the two main two databases -Web of Science and Scopus- since both index a significantly higher proportion of English-language journals (Hammarfelt and Haddow, 2018). Furthermore, some researchers tend to publish monographs or books to communicate their findings, and these outputs are usually not indexed by these databases (Lariviere et al., 2006; Marx and Bornmann, 2015). And contrary to what occurs in natural science, citation accumulation in social sciences, arts, and humanities tends to be slower over the years, causing a detrimental effect during curricular assessments of researchers (Pajic et al., 2019). It is important to note that both databases tally citations based on the references registered by each database (Marx and Bornmann, 2015).

While studying the online attention generated by articles published by Chilean researchers in journals included in the Social Sciences Citation Index and the Arts and Humanities Citation Index from Web of Science, we noticed that not only some documents lacked a DOI, but some journals exhibited an irregular use of DOIs throughout the 5-year period assessed. To verify whether the lack of DOIs was due to database processing errors or to the absence of DOIs in the articles, we repeated the query using Scopus as the source of information and later verified the information by accessing the website of each journal. Therefore, this study aimed to establish whether the DOIs associated to every article are being registered by the two main citation databases, using data from 40 journals that exhibited the highest degree of irregularity in DOI usage according to the Web of Science output. To our knowledge, only one previous study reported issues with the registration of DOIs by a citation database for documents published by two journals between 2005-2014 (Gorraiz et al., 2016). It is important to note that while more recent studies have reported that a proportion of the records downloaded from these databases lacked DOIs (Khurana et al., 2022; Mugnaini et al., 2021), none performed a DOI check in the journals’ websites to determine the origin of the problem.

Materials and methods

Bibliometric data for this study was retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database in December 2021. The WoS database was chosen for this study because the main Chilean research grant (Fondecyt) utilizes this database to assess all researchers as part of the evaluation process performed by the Chilean National Agency for Research and Development (ANID).

The search criteria (CU=Chile and PY=2015-2019) was used to extract publications registered by the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) and the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) collections. This query resulted in 12,396 documents that registered at least one affiliation to a Chilean institution. The downloaded data was sorted and processed using Microsoft Excel. For each document we obtained the title, source, ISSN, publisher, document type and DOI.

The Scopus database was used to search for article-type documents for the 40 journals that exhibited the highest degree of irregularity in DOI usage according to the previous Web of Science query.

Furthermore, publisher names were normalized and classified into one of three categories (Krauskopf, 2021):

  • Commercial Publisher: Defined as a profit-oriented firm not associated with universities.

  • Non-university academic publisher: Refers to scientific societies or any other type of academic body not associated with universities.

  • University Press: Any publisher belonging to a university.

Results

Among the 12,396 documents that were published between 2015-2019 by Chilean researchers, we observed that 3,085 (24.9%) were not associated to a DOI. These documents were published in 323 different journals. To assess the implementation of DOIs over the period 2015-2019, we selected all the journals that had published a minimum of 20 documents without DOIs (Figure 1). The purpose was to determine whether these journals were not employing DOIs or whether DOI usage was inconsistent throughout the selected period. This accounted for 40 journals (Table 1), which have been sorted by publisher type (commercial, non-university academic publisher or university publisher). Among the journals managed by commercial publishers, the Journal of Dental Education attracted attention because it was the only journal that appeared to not have implemented DOI usage during 2015 and 2016. As this seemed peculiar, we consulted the journal website (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/loi/19307837) to verify whether this was correct. To our surprise, we confirmed that all the papers published in 2015 and 2016 were associated with a DOI. Therefore, we questioned whether this inaccuracy extended to the other 39 journals. One way to solve this question was to download data from another database, Scopus, which indexed the same journals. However, as Web of Science and Scopus differ slightly in the type of documents registered, we focused our queries on article-type documents as these are recorded by both databases (Liu et al., 2021).

Figure 1 Overview of the search query and journal eligibility process 

Table 1 Proportion of documents associated with a DOI published by each journal 

Journal Title Publisher1 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Economic Systems CP 98% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Ergonomics CP 93% 100% 100% 99% 100%
International Labour Review CP 98% 100% 96% 100% 67%
Journal of Dental Education CP 0% 0% 67% 98% 67%
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A CP 96% 94% 99% 97% 86%
Lancet Global Health CP 100% 100% 98% 92% 100%
Acta Literaria NUAP 32% 0% 37% 7% 27%
Revista Argentina de Clinica Psicológica NUAP 0% 0% 89% 94% 100%
Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnostico y Evaluacion NUAP 0% 47% 95% 95% 95%
Revista Médica de Chile NUAP 86% 40% 71% 74% 47%
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica NUAP 1% 0% 38% 100% 97%
RLA - Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada NUAP 44% 53% 50% 75% 29%
Terapia Psicológica NUAP 96% 32% 31% 78% 42%
Acta Bioethica UP 22% 19% 27% 27% 24%
ALPHA - Revista de Artes Letras y Filosofía UP 46% 20% 42% 56% 93%
Andamios UP 36% 38% 29% 77% 86%
ARQ UP 31% 48% 22% 38% 44%
Arte Individuo y Sociedad UP 88% 70% 98% 100% 100%
Atenea UP 45% 0% 48% 27% 7%
Chungara - Revista de Antropologia Chilena UP 27% 93% 100% 100% 100%
Convergencia - Revista de Ciencias Sociales UP 0% 0% 26% 100% 100%
Estudios Atacameños UP 32% 9% 16% 100% 100%
Estudios Filológicos UP 28% 30% 31% 43% 70%
EURE UP 95% 86% 67% 100% 93%
Historia Unisinos UP 97% 95% 90% 95% 96%
Historia y Comunicación Social UP 81% 100% 86% 98% 98%
Ideas y Valores UP 95% 87% 68% 95% 83%
Magallania UP 76% 79% 71% 87% 29%
Papeles de Población UP 0% 25% 92% 100% 100%
Pensamiento UP 42% 8% 57% 38% 52%
Revista 180 UP 0% 0% 0% 5% 95%
Revista Chilena de Derecho UP 17% 27% 29% 12% 20%
Revista Chilena de Literatura UP 44% 20% 37% 32% 28%
Revista de Ciencias Política UP 45% 45% 41% 86% 59%
Revista de Filosofía UP 50% 55% 0% 28% 0%
Revista de Geografía Norte Grande UP 27% 46% 46% 50% 42%
Revista Musical Chilena UP 24% 29% 21% 24% 0%
Revista Signos UP 100% 72% 100% 100% 100%
Teología y Vida UP 67% 53% 77% 91% 36%
Universitas Psychologica UP 26% 89% 95% 97% 100%

1 Publisher indicates whether it corresponds to a commercial publisher (CP), non-university academic publisher (NUAP) or university publisher (UP)

Table 2 shows the total number of article-type documents published by each journal between 2015 and 2019 and the proportion of these documents that registered a DOI, according to Web of Science and Scopus. The differences observed across data sources are concerning considering we have adjusted our queries to the same document type. Among 16 journals (Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, RLA - Revista de Lingüística Teorica y Aplicada, ALPHA - Revista de Artes Letras y Filosofía, Arte Individuo y Sociedad, Convergencia - Revista de Ciencias Sociales, Estudios Filológicos, Historia Unisinos, Historia y Comunicación Social, Ideas y Valores, Pensamiento, Revista 180, Revista Chilena de Derecho, Revista Chilena de Literatura, Revista de Geografía Norte Grande, Revista Musical Chilena, Teología y Vida) we established a difference of more than 20% in the number of article-type documents registered by both databases. Furthermore, in the case of the journals Historia Unisinos and Historia y Comunicación Social this difference is over 100%. It is important to note that Scopus’s coverage of the journal Revista de Filosofia began in 2016, thus it was not included among these journals.

Table 2 Article-type documents published by each journal between 2015-2019 

Web of Science Scopus
Journal Title Total DOI % DOI Total DOI % DOI
Economic Systems 209 208 100% 209 209 100%
Ergonomics 708 696 98% 692 692 100%
International Labour Review 137 125 91% 139 139 100%
Journal of Dental Education 613 316 52% 746 556 75%
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 284 284 100% 261 260 100%
Lancet Global Health 376 371 99% 414 414 100%
Acta Literaria 84 22 26% 80 80 100%
Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica 170 115 68% 213 154 72%
Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación 200 165 83% 211 156 74%
Revista Médica de Chile 907 603 66% 977 969 99%
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica 572 265 46% 481 232 48%
RLA - Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada 69 38 55% 54 54 100%
Terapia Psicológica 101 57 56% 105 104 99%
Acta Bioethica 148 46 31% 152 152 100%
ALPHA - Revista de Artes Letra y Filosofía 183 99 54% 147 146 99%
Andamios 191 115 60% 206 204 99%
ARQ 191 73 38% 222 204 92%
Arte Individuo y Sociedad 206 195 95% 160 160 100%
Atenea 129 33 26% 134 84 63%
Chungara - Revista de Antropología Chilena 211 174 82% 228 129 57%
Convergencia - Revista de Ciencias Sociales 136 63 46% 102 50 49%
Estudios Atacameños 160 96 60% 181 101 56%
Estudios Filológicos 126 59 47% 94 58 62%
EURE 184 163 89% 191 191 100%
Historia Unisinos 187 187 100% 89 89 100%
Historia y Comunicación Social 162 160 99% 56 55 98%
Ideas y Valores 234 228 97% 170 170 100%
Magallania 142 104 73% 156 156 100%
Papeles de Población 175 113 65% 185 114 62%
Pensamiento 317 172 54% 188 176 94%
Revista 180 98 21 21% 54 21 39%
Revista Chilena de Derecho 184 43 23% 103 98 95%
Revista Chilena de Literatura 163 52 32% 95 57 60%
Revista de Ciencias Política 138 72 52% 143 143 100%
Revista de Filosofía (*) 83 29 35% 46 46 100%
Revista de Geografía Norte Grande 155 68 44% 125 62 50%
Revista Musical Chilena 64 25 39% 91 90 99%
Revista Signos 132 124 94% 139 139 100%
Teología y Vida 98 62 63% 125 125 100%
Universitas Psychologica 543 436 80% 582 567 97%

“Total” indicates the total number of article-type documents published in the 5-year period “DOI” indicates the total number of article-type documents that had a DOI registered by the databases; “%” indicates the proportion of article-type documents that was associated to a DOI. (*) Journal coverage began in 2016, thus the number of article-type documents associated with this journal is for the period 2016-2019

In addition, Table 2 shows that Web of Science registered less DOIs associated to article-type documents in comparison to Scopus. In fact, while Web of Science registered 100% of DOIs for only three journals (Economic Systems, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series, and Historia Unisinos), Scopus reported 100% for 17 journals. Since we had previously established a database processing error with the Journal of Dental Education, we accessed the websites of the 23 journals that exhibited less than 100% of article-type documents associated to a DOI to confirm whether it was due to the absence of DOI in the document or another database processing error (Table 3).

Table 3 Proportion of article-type documents published by each journal that is associated to a DOI according to each journals´website 

Website
Journal Title Total DOI % DOI
Journal of Dental Education 746 746 100%
Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica 213 154 72%
Revista Iberoamericana de Diagnóstico y Evaluación 211 211 100%
Revista Médica de Chile 977 977 100%
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica 481 481 100%
Terapia Psicológica 105 105 100%
ALPHA - Revista de Artes Letras y Filosofía 147 147 100%
Andamios 206 206 100%
ARQ 222 222 100%
Atenea 134 134 100%
Chungara - Revista de Antropología Chilena 228 228 100%
Convergencia - Revista de Ciencias Sociales 102 102 100%
Estudios Atacameños 181 181 100%
Estudios Filológicos 94 94 100%
Historia y Comunicación Social 56 56 100%
Papeles de Población 185 114 62%
Pensamiento 188 188 100%
Revista 180 54 54 100%
Revista Chilena de Derecho 103 103 100%
Revista Chilena de Literatura 95 95 100%
Revista de Geografía Norte Grande 125 125 100%
Revista Musical Chilena 91 90 100%
Universitas Psychologica 582 567 97%

An analysis of each article-type document published by the 23 journals revealed that the DOIs were under recorded by Web of Science and Scopus for 20 publications (Table 3). In fact, these 20 journals had a DOI associated to the totality of article-type documents. It is alarming that for a journal such as Revista 180 Web of Science only registered 21% of DOIs and Scopus 39%, even though the journal had a DOI associated to every article-type document. A similar situation was observed for another journal, Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica, for which less than 50% of DOIs were registered by both databases.

Finally, special attention needs to be drawn to the journal Atenea. While all the article-type documents published in the five-year period included a DOI (Table 3) only 26% were associated to a DOI (Table 2) according to Web of Science. A closer look revealed that, for some unknown reason, Web of Science did not register the DOIs for all the article-type documents published in 2016 and those published in 2019 lacked DOIs altogether. Contrarily, Scopus registered DOIs for 63% of article-type documents published by the journal on every year assessed.

Discussion and conclusion

Databases play an important role during research assessment. Data extracted from Web of Science and Scopus, two high-cost subscription databases, is recurrently utilized to produce university rankings, evaluate tenure and promotion at universities, perform curricular assessments of researchers by grant funding agencies, etc. While these databases are perceived as accurate regarding the information registered, they are not exempt of errors (Krauskopf, 2019; Shuo et al., 2019; Liu, 2020; Purnell, 2022; Savchenko y Kosyakov, 2022). Concerning errors in the DOI field, a few years ago Franceschini et al. (2015) established the existence of some DOIs that were shared between different publications indexed by Scopus, distorting the outcome of the bibliometric analysis. A later study from Zhu et al. (2019) reported 119 DOIs downloaded from Web of Science that were not found in the DOI System. Considering that the DOI was conceived as a unique and permanent identifier, the existence of such cases is perplexing.

In this study we report inconsistencies in DOI registration by Web of Science and Scopus. Even though most of the analyzed journals have associated a DOI to every article-type document (Table 3), both databases displayed problems registering this information. While Gorraiz et al. (2016) previously established that Web of Science had problems registering DOIs for documents published by two journals (out of 35), we determined this matter has not been solved for Latin American journals managed by non-university academic publishers and university presses in disciplines related to the Social Sciences, Arts, and Humanities. Likewise, Sanz-Casado et al. (2021) reported that DOI usage was higher (62%) for Norwegian, Finnish, and Spanish journals in the field of humanities, in comparison to journals managed by university presses (59%) and non-university academic publishers (29%). Besides the complications that may arise from citation tracking (Liu, 2021; Habermann, 2023), the missing DOIs in the downloaded data prevents users from utilizing these identifiers to track the online attention of these articles through Altmetrics.

In a recent study using data extracted from Web of Science, Khurana et al. (2022) established that 16.1% of the documents published by 1000 journals were without a DOI. It is important to note that this study did not discriminate between document types, therefore we expected to find a minor proportion of documents (such as news items or corrections) not associated to a DOI. Conversely, the study published by Mugnaini et al. (2021) which only considered three document types (articles, reviews, and proceedings papers) written by Brazilian researchers between 2012-2016, established that 68% of them included a DOI.

Another important issue that needs to be considered is the fact that to obtain a DOI publishers need to pay a fee, which may be cost-prohibited for all document types. A study on Ecuadorian journals suggested that this might be the reason why only 78% complied with the use of DOI (Santiago-Padilla y Ramos-Gil, 2022). Similarly, another study on Chinese journals reported that 80% used DOIs due to a lack of government support and lack of understanding about their importance. (Wang et al., 2018).

While databases need to continually improve their procedure to annotate all the metadata provided by each journal to ensure the accuracy and consistency of the collected data, the editorial management team also share responsibility in this matter. By the time databases collect metadata from the journal´s website, all articles should have DOIs assigned. A delay in the process of assigning DOIs will result in databases registries lacking DOIs. It is important to note that, for a researcher, choosing a journal to submit a manuscript is not trivial as everyone hopes that their work will be visible to others. Thus, the implementation of DOIs by journals will not only assist citation tracking but will increase their visibility.

References

Ansorge, L. (2023) “Hidden limitations of analyses via alternative bibliometric services”. Scientometrics 128(3): 2031-2033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04626-w [ Links ]

Breuer, Timo., Philipp Schaer y Dirk Tunger. 2022. “Relevance assessments, bibliometrics, and altmetrics: a quantitative study on Pubmed and arXiv”. Scientometrics 127(5): 2455-2478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04319-4 [ Links ]

Chen, Ming y Linzi Wang. 2022. “An Altmetrics and citation analysis of selected predatory journals in library and information science field”. Journal of Academic Librarian-ship 48(6): 102618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102618 [ Links ]

Cintra, Paulo Roberto, Ariadne Chloe Furnival y Douglas Henrique Milanez. 2018. “The impact of open access citation and social media on leading top information science journals”. Investigacion Bibliotecologica 32(77): 117-132. https://doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2018.77.57874 [ Links ]

Fanelli, Daniele. 2009. “How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data”. PLoS ONE 4(5): e5738. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005738 [ Links ]

Franceschini, Fiorenzo, Domenico Maisano y Luca Mastrogiacomo. 2015. “Errors in DOI indexing by bibliometric databases”. Scientometrics 102(3): 2181-2186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1503-4 [ Links ]

Frandsen, Tove Faber y Jeppe Nicolaisen. 2008. “Intradisciplinary differences in data-base coverage and the consequences for bibliometric research”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59(10): 1570-1581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20817 [ Links ]

Germain, Anne Carol. 2000. “URLs: Uniform resource locators or unreliable resource locators”. College & Research Libraries 61(4): 359-365. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.61.4.35 [ Links ]

Gorraiz, Juan, David Melero-Fuentes, Christian Gumpenberger y Juan Carlos Valderrama-Zurian. 2016. “Availability of digital object identifiers (DOIs) in Web of Science and Scopus”. Journal of Informetrics. 10(1): 98-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.008 [ Links ]

Habermann, Ted. 2023. “Improving domain repository connectivity”. Data Intelligence 5(1): 6-26. https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00120 [ Links ]

Hammarfelt, Bjorn y Gaby Haddow. 2018. “Conflicting measures and values: How humanities scholars in Australia and Sweden use and react to bibliometric indicators”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 69(7): 924-935. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24043 [ Links ]

Haynes, J. 1999. “New Journal of Physics: a web-based and author-funded journal.” Learned Publishing. Vol. 12: 265-269 [ Links ]

Hvistendahl, Mara. 2015. “China pursues fraudsters in science publishing: Measures may not be enough to stem the tide, some fear”. Science 350(61264): 1015. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.350.6264.1015 [ Links ]

Khurana, Parul, Geetha Ganesan, Gulshan Kumar, y Kiran Sharma. 2022. “A Bibliometric Analysis to Unveil the Impact of Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) on Bibliometric Indicators”. Proceedings of Third International Conference on Computing, Communications, and Cyber-Security, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 421: 859-869. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1142-2_67 [ Links ]

Krauskopf, Erwin, 2019. “Missing documents in Scopus: the case of the journal Enfermeria Nefrologica”. Scientometrics 119(1): 543-547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03040-z [ Links ]

Krauskopf, Erwin. 2021. “Article processing charge expenditure in Chile: The current situation”. Learned Publishing 34(4): 637-646. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1413 [ Links ]

Larivière, Vincent, Éric Archambault, Yves Gingras y Étienne Vignola-Gagné. 2006. “The place of serials in referencing practices: Comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57(8): 997-1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20349 [ Links ]

Liu, Jia. 2021. “Digital object identifier (DOI) and DOI services: An overview”. LIBRI 71(4): 349-360. https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2020-0018 [ Links ]

Liu, Chieh y Mu-Hsuan Huang. 2022. “Exploring the relationships between altmetric counts and citations of papers in different academic fields based on co-occurrence analysis”. Scientometrics 127(8): 4939-4958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04456-w [ Links ]

Liu, Weishu. 2020.” Accuracy of funding information in Scopus: a comparative case study”. Scientometrics 124(1): 803-811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03458-w [ Links ]

Liu, Weishu, Meiting Huang y Haifeng Wang. 2021. “Same journal but different numbers of published records indexed in Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection: causes, consequences, and solutions”. Scientometrics 126(5): 4541-4550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03934-x [ Links ]

Marx, Werner y Lutz Bornmann. 2015. “On the causes of subject-specific citation rates in Web of Science”. Scientometrics 102(2): 1823-1827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1499-9 [ Links ]

Mugnaini, Rogerio, Grischa Fraumann, Esteban F. Tuesta y Abel L. Packer. 2021. “Openness trends in Brazilian citation data: factors related to the use of DOIs”. Scientometrics 126(3): 2523-2556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03663-7 [ Links ]

Manjunatha, G., B.T.S Kumar y H. Lakshmana. 2020. “Longevity of URL citations Cited in LIS journal articles: A Webometric Study”. Library Philosophy and Science 2020: 3965 [ Links ]

Nagajara, Aragudije, Shine Joseph, S.A., Hyla Polen y Kevin Clauson. 2011. “Disappearing act: Persistence and attrition of uniform resource locators (URLs) in an open access medical journal”. Program Electronic Library and Information Systems 45(1): 98-106. https://doi.org/10.1108/00330331111107420 [ Links ]

Pajic, Dejan, Tanja Jevremov and Marko Skoric. 2019. “Publication and citation patterns in the social sciences and humanities: A national perspective”. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie 44(1): 67-94. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjs29214 [ Links ]

Parnas, David Lorge. 2007. “Stop the numbers game”. Communications of the ACM 50(11): 19-21. https://doi.org/10.1145/1297797.1297815 [ Links ]

Paskin, Norman. 2005. “Digital object identifiers for scientific data”. Data Science Journal 4: 12-20. [ Links ]

Purnell, Philip J. 2022. “The prevalence and impact of university affiliation discrepancies between four bibliographic databases-Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, and Microsoft Academic”. Quantitative Science Studies 3(1): 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00175 [ Links ]

Sampath Kumar, B.T. y V. Vinay Kumar. 2013. “HTTP 404-page (not) found: Recovery of decayed URL citations. Journal of Informetrics 7(1):145-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.09.007 [ Links ]

Santiago-Padilla, Victor y Yalitza Therly Ramos-Gil. 2022. Indicators to achieve a better positioning of Ecuadorian scientific journals”. Revista Bionatura 7(1): 2. https://doi.org/10.21931/RB/2022.07.01.2 [ Links ]

Sanz-Casado, Elias, Daniela De Filippo, Rafael Aleixandre Benavent, Vidar Roeggen y Janne Pölönen. 2021. “Impact and visibility of Norwegian, Finnish and Spanish journals in the fields of humanities”. Scientometrics 126(11): 9031-9049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-044169-6 [ Links ]

Savchenko, Igor y Denis Kosyakov. 2022. “Lost in affiliation: apatride publications in international databases”. Scientometrics 127(6): 3471-3487. https://doi.org/0.1007/s11192-022-04392-9 [ Links ]

Shanthakumari, Keshava. 2021. “An analysis of persistence and obsolescence of web citations of pavement engineering literature”. Library and Philosophy Practice 2021: 1-9 [ Links ]

Shuo, Xu, Liyuan Hao, Xin An, Dongsheng Zhai y Hongshen Pang. 2019. “Types of DOI errors of cited references in Web of Science with a cleaning method”. Scientometrics 120(3): 1427-1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03162-4 [ Links ]

Vinay Kumar, D., y V.T. Sampath Kumar. 2017. “Finding the unfound: Recovery of missing URLs through Internet Archive”. Annals of Library and Information Science. 64(3): 165-171 [ Links ]

Wang, Weilang, Lvxiang Deng, Bin You, Ping Zhang y Yifeng Chen. 2018. “Digital object identifier and its use in core Chinese academic journals: A Chinese perspective”. Learned Publishing 31: 19-154. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1137 [ Links ]

Zhu, Junwen; Guangyuan Hu y Weishu Liu. 2019. “DOI errors and posible solutions for Web of Science”. Scientometrics 118(2): 709-718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2980-7 [ Links ]

Funding. This research was funded by ANID-FONDECYT, grant number 1211494.

Received: April 19, 2023; Accepted: August 01, 2023

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License