Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses
Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses
复制标题
DOI：
10.1096/fj.07-9492lsf
复制
发表时间：
2008-02-01
期刊：
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Pappas, Georgios
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Falagas, Matthew E.;Pitsouni, Eleni I.;Pappas, Georgios
电子时代的发展导致了万维网上众多医学数据库的发展，提供了特定主题的搜索工具和进行引文分析的能力。我们比较了PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Google Scholar的内容覆盖率和实际效用。数据库的官方网页用于提取有关所涵盖期刊范围、搜索设施和限制以及更新频率的信息。我们使用的关键字搜索的例子，以评估这些数据库在生物医学信息检索和特定的已发表的文章，以评估其在执行引用分析的效用的有用性。所有数据库都实用，并提供了许多搜索设施。PubMed和Google Scholar是免费的。PubMed的关键词搜索提供了最佳的更新频率，并包括在线早期文章;其他数据库可以通过引用次数对文章进行评级，作为重要性指数。对于引文分析，Scopus提供的覆盖率比Web of Science高出约20%，而Google Scholar提供的结果准确性不一致。PubMed仍然是生物医学电子研究的最佳工具。Scopus涵盖更广泛的期刊范围，在关键词搜索和引文分析方面都有帮助，但与Web of Science相比，它目前仅限于最近的文章（1995年之后发表）。谷歌学术，就像一般的网络一样，可以帮助检索即使是最晦涩的信息，但它的使用受到引用信息不足，更新频率较低的影响。
The evolution of the electronic age has led to the development of numerous medical databases on the World Wide Web, offering search facilities on a particular subject and the ability to perform citation analysis. We compared the content coverage and practical utility of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The official Web pages of the databases were used to extract information on the range of journals covered, search facilities and restrictions, and update frequency. We used the example of a keyword search to evaluate the usefulness of these databases in biomedical information retrieval and a specific published article to evaluate their utility in performing citation analysis. All databases were practical in use and offered numerous search facilities. PubMed and Google Scholar are accessed for free. The keyword search with PubMed offers optimal update frequency and includes online early articles; other databases can rate articles by number of citations, as an index of importance. For citation analysis, Scopus offers about 20% more coverage than Web of Science, whereas Google Scholar offers results of inconsistent accuracy. PubMed remains an optimal tool in biomedical electronic research. Scopus covers a wider journal range, of help both in keyword searching and citation analysis, but it is currently limited to recent articles ( published after 1995) compared with Web of Science. Google Scholar, as for the Web in general, can help in the retrieval of even the most obscure information but its use is marred by inadequate, less often updated, citation information.