SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The need to develop tailored tools for improving the quality of thematic bibliometric analyses: Evidence from papers published in Sustainability and Scientometrics
16 references·0 citing·38 second hop
The need to develop tailored tools for improving the quality of thematic bibliometric analyses: Evidence from papers published in Sustainability and Scientometrics (2023)The need to develop tailored tools for im…Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)Two new Later Stone Age sites…Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021)Web of Science (WoS) and Scop…PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews (2021)PRISMA-S: an extension to the…Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic (2021)Large-scale comparison of bib…How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines (2021)How to conduct a bibliometric…The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity (2020)The Hong Kong Principles for …Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review (2020)Software tools for conducting…Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources (2019)Which academic search systems…Web of Science and Scopus language coverage (2019)Web of Science and Scopus lan…A Criteria-based Assessment of the Coverage of Scopus and Web of Science (2019)A Criteria-based Assessment o…Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science (2016)Empirical analysis and classi…The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis (2015)The journal coverage of Web o…The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? (2015)The bibliometric analysis of …Facts Are More Important Than Novelty (2014)Facts Are More Important Than…Replications in Psychology Research (2012)Replications in Psychology Re…Journal impact measures in bibliometric research (2002)Journal impact measures in bi…An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books (2010)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)Bibliometric Analysis: The Main Steps (2024)How to design bibliometric research: an overview and a framework proposal (2024)Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The Replication Recipe: What makes for a convincing replication? (2013)Registered Reports (2014)The unity and diversity of executive functions: A systematic review and re-analysis of latent variable studies. (2018)Reliability and Validity Assessment (1979)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research (2020)An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews (2021)Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping (2009)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)Mapping A Discipline: A Guide to Using VOSviewer for Bibliometric and Visual Analysis (2021)A method for analyzing text using VOSviewer (2023)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis (2021)Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases (2021)The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis (2021)Citationchaser: A tool for transparent and efficient forward and backward citation chasing in systematic searching (2022)Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence‐Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review (2003)Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research (2022)Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories (2018)Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice (2022)Artificial Intelligence in Advertising: Advancements, Challenges, and Ethical Considerations in Targeting, Personalization, Content Creation, and Ad Optimization (2023)The Science of Literature Reviews: Searching, Identifying, Selecting, and Synthesising (2023)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2024Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal23,871 cited
  • 2021How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines14,255 cited
  • 2015The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis5,251 cited
  • 2021PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews3,654 cited
  • 2015The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?3,130 cited
  • 2021Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World2,676 cited
  • 2019Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources2,361 cited
  • 2020Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review1,685 cited
  • 2021Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic864 cited
  • 2012Replications in Psychology Research750 cited
  • 2014Facts Are More Important Than Novelty609 cited
  • 2002Journal impact measures in bibliometric research557 cited
  • 2020The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity545 cited
  • 2019Web of Science and Scopus language coverage

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

388 cited
  • 2019A Criteria-based Assessment of the Coverage of Scopus and Web of Science343 cited
  • 2016Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science223 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.