In general, two criteria determine the optimal search system for a given purpose: the search functionality offered and the coverage provided. Because of these trends, researchers need guidance on which bibliographic databases are best in their discipline. Fourth, institutional resources available to researchers only show a partial picture of the entire range of bibliographic databases available-often the most suitable databases remain hidden behind paywalls without the knowledge of researchers. Third, conduct guidance for specific scientific methods-particularly in the field of evidence synthesis-requires increasingly higher levels of rigor in identifying scholarly records (e.g., Higgins et al., 2020 Kugley et al., 2016). Most scholars still rely on Google Scholar for many of their search needs (Gusenbauer, 2021 Nicholas et al., 2017). Second, an increasingly diverse search system landscape makes it increasingly difficult to select the best databases and systems with which scholarly records are accessed. More than ever, researchers need to know how and where to search, predominantly because of four trends: First, exponential increases in the output of scholarly records require scholars to think where they can best access these records (Gusenbauer, 2021). Researchers rely on searches to be comprehensive to identify the most scholarly records relevant to their work. Researchers without institutional access learn which open databases are likely most comprehensive in their disciplines. This comparison can also help librarians and other information experts re-evaluate expensive database procurement strategies. Searching with more comprehensive databases can improve finding, particularly when selecting the most fitting databases needs particular thought, such as in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. These findings should encourage researchers to re-evaluate their go-to databases, also against newly introduced options. For example, researchers might be surprised how Meta (discontinued), Embase, or Europe PMC are found to cover more records than PubMed in Medicine and other health subjects. The findings illustrate not only differences in the disciplinary coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, or Web of Science, but also of less frequently analyzed databases. Knowing the databases’ relative subject coverage allows the selection of specialized databases for searches requiring high precision/specificity, particularly relevant in systematic searches. Knowing the databases’ absolute subject coverage allows the selection of the most comprehensive databases for searches requiring high recall/sensitivity, particularly relevant in lookup or exploratory searches. The findings show the relative and absolute subject coverages of 56 databases-information that has often not been available before. The method extends existing sampling-based approaches that analyze smaller sets of database coverages. The method uses query results as a common denominator to compare a wide variety of search engines, repositories, digital libraries, and other bibliographic databases. Through agreements with some of the world’s most prestigious publishers-including Cambridge University Press, Dow Jones & Company, Emerald Group Publishing, Palgrave MacMillan, the Financial Times Group, and the Economist Intelligence Unit-ProQuest provides access to hundreds of key business titles.This paper introduces a novel scientometrics method and applies it to estimate the subject coverages of many of the popular English-focused bibliographic databases in academia. Launched in the early 1970s, ABI/INFORM Global remains the gold standard when it comes to business research databases. ABI/INFORM Global massive content set - which includes important full‐text journals and much sought‐after titles from the business press as well as key trade publications, dissertations, conference proceedings, and market reports - will help today’s researchers resolve tomorrow’s problems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |