Research topic
Report
Detailed summary
The literature search found that OpenAlex provides broader coverage than traditional databases like Web of Science and Scopus in some respects, but faces challenges with metadata completeness and accuracy, particularly in references, affiliations, and abstracts [1, 2, 3].
Metadata Completeness and Coverage: Studies show OpenAlex often has wider coverage, especially for underrepresented regions and open-access publications, but lacks completeness in key fields such as abstracts and affiliations, compared to databases like Scopus and Web of Science [1, 2, 3].
Accuracy and Data Quality: There are discrepancies in metadata accuracy; OpenAlex’s reference and citation counts sometimes differ from those calculated independently, hinting at issues with data precision [1]. Its author and affiliation data require improved disambiguation methods for higher reliability [2, 4].
Utility for Bibliometric Analyses: While offering potential for inclusive analyses, OpenAlex's inconsistencies and gaps in metadata pose challenges for reliable bibliometric evaluations [2, 5]. Studies call for ongoing improvements in metadata quality to enhance OpenAlex's utility in research impact assessments [3, 7].
These findings highlight a balance between OpenAlex's strength in coverage and its limitations in metadata accuracy, emphasizing the need for continued development to improve its bibliometric applications.
Categories of papers
- Focuses on studies directly comparing OpenAlex with other databases like Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions, assessing metadata completeness and accuracy (e.g., references, citations, affiliations, abstracts).
- References: [1], [2], [3], [5], [6], [7], [8]
- Details:
- [1] compares reference and additional metadata fields across OpenAlex, Web of Science, and Scopus.
- [2] evaluates OpenAlex's suitability for bibliometric analyses using Scopus as a benchmark.
- [3] provides a regional-specific comparison of African publications.
- [5] analyzes field-normalized citation scores across OpenAlex and other databases.
- [6] benchmarks abstract completeness across seven databases, including OpenAlex.
- [7] assesses metadata completeness in eight free-access databases.
- [8] examines bibliographic data conservation between Microsoft Academic Graph and OpenAlex.
- Discusses the balance and trade-offs between metadata completeness and accuracy in OpenAlex, without always offering direct comparisons with other databases.
- References: [2], [9], [10]
- Details:
- [2] highlights gaps in metadata accuracy within OpenAlex despite broader coverage.
- [9] addresses linguistic coverage accuracy and completeness in OpenAlex compared to Web of Science.
- [10] compares funder metadata completeness between OpenAlex and Dimensions.
- Studies focused on how OpenAlex compares with other databases in terms of inclusivity and diversity, often highlighting broader coverage but varying metadata accuracy.
- References: [3], [4], [13]
- Details:
- [3] evaluates coverage and metadata for African publications, pointing out issues in affiliation metadata.
- [4] discusses inclusivity concerning scholar migration patterns but primarily compares affiliations.
- [13] covers publication distribution among publishers rather than detailed metadata aspects.
- Explores specific methods used for metadata comparison, focusing on narrower aspects like document classification or bibliometric suitability, occasionally lacking broad empirical comparison.
- References: [8], [11]
- Details:
- [8] assesses metadata relevance for bibliometrics between OpenAlex and Microsoft Academic Graph.
- [11] compares publication and document type classification but does not focus deeply on metadata accuracy.
- Includes works that discuss metadata completeness and quality but do not directly compare OpenAlex with other databases.
- References: [12], [14], [15]
- Details:
- [12] evaluates publication metadata completeness in various databases quantitatively.
- [14] focuses on dataset citation dynamics within OpenAlex.
- [15] provides an online system to verify publication metadata across databases, lacking an empirical comparative angle.
These categories synthesize key findings and data relevant to evaluating OpenAlex's metadata completeness and accuracy in comparison with other scholarly databases, essential for understanding its utility and challenges in bibliometric research.
Timeline and citation network
Shift Toward Open Databases:
- The evolution of scholarly metadata began with a focus on proprietary databases like Web of Science and Scopus. The appearance of OpenAlex marks a significant shift toward open, community-assisted databases [1, 3]. This trend aligns with a broader movement for open access and transparency in scholarly communications.
Metadata Coverage and Inclusivity:
- Recent studies from 2023-2024 demonstrate a keen interest in assessing OpenAlex's ability to expand inclusivity and enhance coverage, particularly for underrepresented regions. Researchers such as Culbert et al. [1] and Alonso-Alvarez & van Eck [3] highlight OpenAlex's comparative strength in coverage while noting its limitations in metadata completeness.
Focus on Metadata Completeness and Accuracy:
- From 2023 onwards, there's a notable increase in empirical studies analyzing metadata fields (references, affiliations, language) within OpenAlex, comparing them with other databases [1, 2, 6]. This interest reflects a broader recognition of the role accurate metadata plays in effective bibliometric analysis.
Philipp Mayr and Collaborators:
- Consistent contributions to the field are evident from Philipp Mayr et al. [1, 11], focusing on empirical metadata analysis across multiple databases. Their work has been cited multiple times, indicating sustained impact.
Lorena Delgado-Quirós and José Luis Ortega:
- Their studies [6, 7, 12] contribute to the understanding of metadata completeness in free-access databases, providing insights into the comparative assessment of OpenAlex with other scholarly platforms.
Vincent Larivière and Collaborators:
- Active in evaluating metadata consistency and reference coverage, Larivière's work [9, 13] informs discussions about data quality across growing numbers of databases, including OpenAlex's impact on linguistic diversity and smaller publisher inclusion.
These researchers collectively contribute towards a comprehensive understanding of OpenAlex's place within the evolving landscape of citation indexes, emphasizing the balance between inclusivity and metadata accuracy.