CITATIONS TO REVIEW SERIALS

Abstract

It is generally agreed that the scientific review literature is of great value to both the scientific and lay communities. The combination of an overview of the progress of a scientific discipline and the simultaneous evaluation of the more important literature contributing to that development appears to be exceedingly powerful. There are many different types of review ranging from those which are not much more than an annotated bibliography to the seminal, almost monographic, work. Each review, to a variable extent, forms a comprehensive, reasonably up‐to‐date, single source of both didactic and bibliographic information which by its very nature provides an impressive time‐saving tool, particularly for the user searching for information in a somewhat unfamiliar area. Indeed in some disciplines, reviews appear to be used to a greater extent than abstracting and indexing services. The very usefulness of reviews also implies that a great deal of intellectual effort must be put into their production and again this varies considerably, being correlated with the final perceived quality of the review. The investments in intellectual effort may be estimated at 5 million man hours annually and total production costs are conservatively estimated at £65 million annually worldwide.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.