Scopus or Web of Science for a bibliometric profile of pharmacy research at a Nigerian university?

  • Nelius Boshoff Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) and the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (SciSTIP), Stellenbosch University
  • Moses A. Akanmu Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST), Stellenbosch University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7553/83-2-1682
Keywords: Africa, Collaboration, Pharmacy, Research, Scopus, Web of Science

Abstract

Previous comparisons between Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) paid little attention to universities in African countries. This study investigated the effect of using different data sources on the bibliometric profile of Obafemi Awolowo University in Nigeria, focusing on the Faculty of Pharmacy for the period 1990-2013. In addition to data from Scopus and WoS, the analysis included articles from the curriculum vitae (CVs) of the faculty staff. The combined dataset (Scopus, WoS and CV data) provided answers to the central question: What differences can be observed in the bibliometric profile of research when comparing the Scopus and WoS output to the total article output? Although Scopus and WoS differed in size, the results of each showed a similar pattern. Notable differences were found with regard to indicators of research collaboration. WoS in particular appeared to be biased towards international collaboration. Additional sources of articles (beyond WoS and Scopus) are required to assess adequately research performance at faculty level for a university in a developing country. The quality aspect of those additional sources cannot be ignored.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Nelius Boshoff, Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) and the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (SciSTIP), Stellenbosch University
Nelius Boshoff is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) at Stellenbosch University, South Africa. CREST is the host of the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (SciSTIP).
Moses A. Akanmu, Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST), Stellenbosch University
Moses Atanda Akanmu conducted this bibliometric research as part of the requirements for an MPhil in Science and Technology Studies at CREST. He is a professor in the pharmacology department at Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

References

Adriaanse, L.S. and Rensleigh, C. 2013. Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar: a content comprehensiveness comparison. The Electronic Library, 31(6): 727-744.

African Observatory of Science, Technology and Innovation (AOSTI). 2014. Assessment of scientific production in the African Union, 2005–2010. Malabo: African Observatory of Science, Technology and Innovation.

Archambault, E., Vignola-Gagne, É., Côté, G., Larivère, V. and Gingras, Y. 2006. Benchmarking scientific outputs in the social sciences and humanities: the limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3): 329-342.

African Union-New Partnership for Africa’s Development (AU-NEPAD). 2010. African Innovation Outlook 2010. Pretoria: African Union-New Partnership for Africa’s Development.

Boshoff, N. 2009. Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa. Scientometrics, 81(2): 413-434.

Boshoff, N. 2010. South-south research collaboration of countries in the Southern African Development Community (SADC). Scientometrics, 84(2): 481-503.

Ball, R. and Tunger, D. 2006. Science indicators revisited: Science Citation Index versus Scopus. A citation comparison of both citation databases. Information Services and Use, 26(4): 293-301.

Bar-Ilan, J. 2008. Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century: a review. Journal of Informetrics, 2(1): 1-52.

Bartol, T. and Mackiewicz-Talarczyk, M. 2015. Bibliometric analysis of publishing trends in fiber crops in Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Journal of Natural Fibers, 12(6): 531-541.

Bartol, T., Budimir, G. and Dekleva-Smrekar, D. 2014. Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia. Scientometrics, 98(2): 1491-1504.

Beall’s list of predatory journals and publishers. 2017. [Online]. http://beallslist.weebly.com/standalone-journals.html (21 August 2017).

De Groote S.L. and Raszewski R. 2012. Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: a case study of the h-index in nursing. Nursing Outlook, 60(6): 391-400.

De Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F. J., González-Molina, A. and Herrero-Solana, V. 2007. Coverage analysis of Scopus: a journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73(1): 53-78.

Franceschini, F., Maisano, D. and Mastrogiacomo, L. 2016a. Do Scopus and WoS correct ‘old’ omitted citations? Scientometrics, 107(2): 321-335.

Franceschini, F., Maisano, D. and Mastrogiacomo, L. 2016b. Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4): 933-953.

Franceschini, F., Maisano, D. and Mastrogiacomo, L. 2016c. The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1): 174-182.

Garfield, E. 1971. The mystery of the transposed journal lists: wherein Bradford's law of scattering is generalized according to Garfield's law of concentration. Current Contents, 1: 222-223.

Gavel, Y. and Iselid, L. 2008. Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study. Online Information Review, 32(1): 8-21.

Gorraiz, J. and Schloegl, C. 2008. A bibliometric analysis of pharmacology and pharmacy journals: Scopus versus Web of Science. Journal of Information Science, 34(5): 715-725.

Harzing, A.-W. and Alakangas, S. 2016. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2): 787-804.

Kosten, J. 2016. A classification of the use of research indicators. Scientometrics, 108(1): 457-464.

López-Illescas, C., De Moya-Anegón, F. and Moed, H.F. 2008. Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4): 304-316.

Mêgnigbêto, E. 2013. Scientific publishing in Benin as seen from Scopus. Scientometrics, 94(3): 911-928.

Meho, L.I. and Sugimoto, C.R. 2009. Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies: a tale of two citation databases: Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(12): 2499-2508.

Michels, C. and Schmoch, U. 2012. The growth of science and database coverage. Scientometrics, 93(3): 831-846.

Moed, H.F. 1996. Differences in the construction of SCI based bibliometric indicators among various producers: a first overview. Scientometrics, 35(2): 177-191.

Mongeon, P. and Paul-Hus, A. 2016. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1): 213-228.

Norris, M. and Oppenheim, C. 2007. Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2): 161-169.

Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU). 2014. Faculty of pharmacy handbook 2011-2013. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University.

Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU). 2015. University annual report 2013/2014. Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University.

Ocholla, D. 2011. An overview of issues, challenges and opportunities of scholarly publishing in information studies in Africa. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 21(1): 1-16.

Ocholla, D., Mostert, J. and Rotich, D.C. 2016. Visibility of University of Zululand and Moi University researchers in Web of Science and Scopus from 2003 to 2013. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 26(1): 3-15.

Onyancha, O.B. and Ocholla, D.N. 2009. Assessing researchers’ performance in developing countries: is Google Scholar an alternative? Mousaion, 27(1): 43-64.

Owusu-Nimo, F. and Boshoff, N. 2017. Research collaboration in Ghana: patterns, motives and roles. Scientometrics, 110(3): 1099-1121.

Pouris, A. and Ho, Y.-S. 2014. Research emphasis and collaboration in Africa. Scientometrics, 98(3): 2169-2184.

Rafols, I., Chavarro, D. and Ciarli, T. 2016. Under-representation of research in the global south. Biases in mainstream journal indexing systems. Paper presented at the International Research Conference on Scientometrics, STI Policy and Science Communication. 31 October - 3 November. Stellenbosch. [Online]. http://www0.sun.ac.za/scistip/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Rafols_I.pdf (11 August 2017).

Russell, J.M. and Rousseau, R. No date. Bibliometrics and institutional evaluation. [Online]. http://www.vub.ac.be/BIBLIO/itp/lecturers/ronald_rousseau/ronald_roussea_stim1_bibliometrics_russell.pdf (30 July 2017).

Sánchez A.D., Del Río Rama, M. and García, J.Á. 2017. Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(1): 8-15.

Torres-Salinas, D., Lopez-Cózar, E.D. and Jiménez-Contreras, E. 2009. Ranking of departments and researchers within a university using two different databases: Web of Science versus Scopus. Scientometrics, 80(3): 761-774.

University of Waterloo Working Group on Bibliometrics. 2016. White paper on bibliometrics: measuring research outputs through bibliometrics. Waterloo: University of Waterloo.

Vieira, E.S. and Gomes, J.A.N.F. 2009. A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university. Scientometrics, 81(2): 587-600.

Wang, Q. and Waltman, L. 2016. Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2): 347-364.

Published
2018-02-24
Issue
Vol. 83 No. 2 (2017)
Section
Research Articles

This journal is an open access journal, and the authors (copyright owners) should be properly acknowledged when works are cited. Authors retain publishing rights without any restrictions.

South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science is an Open Access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of Open Access.

 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License