Scopus today and what is to come in 2016 Dr. Wim Meester Head of Product Management, Scopus 5th International Scientific and Practical Conference «World-Class Scientific Publication: Publishing Ethics, Peer-Review and Content Preparation» May 17-20 2016, Moscow

How is the Russian Federation doing in the international research community

With Project 5-100 Russia has ambitious goals to improve its competitive position Five of the best Russian universities to enter the top 100 of the leading global university rankings by 2020

Scholarly output (Article, Review, Conference Paper) Scholarly output in Russia is increasing over the years to more than 57 thousand documents per year. However, Russia is lagging behind the comparator countries. Source: Scopus data, Article, Review, Conference Papers only (May 2016)

International collaboration Although the level of international collaboration for Russia is one of the highest of the comparator countries, the ratio is slightly decreasing over the years. Source: SciVal data, Article, Review, Conference Papers only (May 2016)

Russian Federation FWCI = 1.10 International collaboration leads to increase of Field Weighted Citation Impact (2013 – 2015) Collaboration FWCI Country FWCI Co-authored publications 2.58 China 0.85 3,505 3.38 Brazil 0.80 1,703 3.30 India 0.76 1,596 2.16 USA 1.44 10,906 36.27 Ghana 1.14 16 Russian Federation FWCI = 1.10 Citation impact compared to the world average. Source: SciVal (May 2016)

Scopus is the gold standard, used by more than 3,500 organizations and 150 funding and assessment bodies UK REF Kiel University Russian Foundation of Basic Research UK BIS Queen’s University Belfast Ural Federal University Michigan Corporate Relations Network STINT MD Anderson Danish BFI Estonia Research Council NCN Poland Germany IFQ European Commission & ERC Keio University FCT Portugal NSF ISTIC Peking University Italy ANVUR Gazi University ReachNC TCI - Thailand IISER NRF -Korea Nanyang Technological University Nigerian Government CAPES Brazil ERA 2014 Rankings:

Why Scopus content coverage gives you a comprehensive view on global research Regarded as the Gold standard. Research organizations, funding bodies and ranking organizations that rely on Scopus data.

61M records from 22K serials, 93K conferences and 123K books Scopus includes content from more than 5,000 publishers and 105 different countries 61M records from 22K serials, 93K conferences and 123K books Updated daily “Articles in Press” from > 3,750 titles 40 different languages covered 3,715 active Gold Open Access journals indexed JOURNALS CONFERENCES BOOKS Physical Sciences 7,443 21,568 peer-reviewed journals 361 trade journals Full metadata, abstracts and cited references (ref’s post-1995 only) 93K conference events 7.5M conference papers Mainly Engineering and Computer Sciences 531 book series 30K Volumes / 1.2M items 123,792 stand-alone books 974K items Focus on Social Sciences and A&H Health Sciences 6,795 Transparent coverage Consistent search results All content in one database Social Sciences 8,086 Life Sciences 4,492 Source: November 2015 title list at https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content

Unbiased, comprehensive journal coverage with titles from many reputable scholarly publishers Publisher neutral Source: November 2015 title list at https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content

Comparison with nearest peer Scopus 22,460 ~22K titles >5,000 publishers Updated daily ~12K titles (Core Collection) 3,300 publishers Updated weekly Web of Science 12,708 Scopus 7,443 (+73%) Scopus 6,795 (+96%) Scopus 4,492 (+50%) Scopus 8,086 (+99%) WoS 4,291 WoS 3,472 WoS 3,002 WoS 4,060 Physical Sciences Health Sciences Life Sciences Social Sciences Source: Web of Science Real Facts, Web of Science title list and Scopus’ own data (May 2016)

How comprehensive is Scopus coverage? Example Russian Science Citation Index   All RSCI titles RSCI titles indexed in Scopus (active + inactive) active Scopus titles inactive Scopus titles Nr. of titles 633 278 243 35 % of RSCI titles 100% 44% 38% 6%

Scopus continues to invest in expansion and enrichment of content

Adding cited references to pre-1996 items in Scopus Coverage years Pre-1996, going back to 1970 Number of articles Around 6M+ articles will be re-processed to include cited references. In addition around 4M pre-1996 articles will be backfilled Scope Archives from major publishers with available digital archives Already 6M pre-1996 documents loaded in Scopus leading to additional 107M cited references In process of adding cited references to pre-1996 articles going back to 1970. Started in 2015. Just over half-way already 6 million pre-1996 documents and 105 million cited references. The project is expected to be complete by the end of this year.

h-index of researchers who started publishing before 1996 is increasing Gerard ‘t Hooft (Nobel prize in Physics, 1999) Increase of citation information will also have a positive effect on the h-index of researchers who published <1996 in h-index increased with 30 points to 43. This is a more accurate representation of the h-index this researcher has Documents published between: 1996 - 2016 Number of publications: 40 Number of citations: 782 h-index: 13 Documents published between: 1971 - 2016 Number of publications: 110 Number of citations: 23,134 h-index: 43

How to use research metrics appropriately and why Scopus offers a basket of metrics Broad content coverage + measure performance in different dimensions

Evolution of research metrics and analytical tools 2016 – CiteScore and Journal metrics module 2015 – Article-level metrics module 2014 – SciVal launches, IPP Journal Metric 2013 – Increased Export limits 2012 – Modified SNIP & SJR, Altmetric, Analyze results 2011 – Export refine 2010 – SNIP & SJR Journal Metrics 2009 – Author Evaluator 2008 – Journal Analyzer 2007 – h-index graph 2006 – Citation Overview (Citation Tracker) 2004 – Scopus launches

Two Golden Rules for appropriate use of research metrics Always use both qualitative and quantitative input into your decisions Always use more than one research metric as the quantitative input

Field-Weighted Citation Impact Citations per Publication Use more than one metric: our basket of metrics must ensure weaknesses can be compensated for Field-Weighted Citation Impact = 2.53 Citations per Publication = 27.8 + Compensates for differences field, type and age Meaningful – 253% of expected People often don’t like small numbers Complicated; difficult to validate How many citations does it represent?

Use more than one metric: our basket of metrics must ensure weaknesses can be compensated for Field-Weighted Citation Impact = 2.53 Citations per Publication = 27.8 + Compensates for differences field, type and age Meaningful – 253% of expected How does this apply to our journal metrics? People often don’t like small numbers Complicated; difficult to validate How many citations does it represent?

Use more than one metric: Journal Metrics Field-Weighted Citation Impact = 2.53 Citations per Publication = 27.8 + CiteScore SNIP, SJR +

CiteScore is easy for users to validate in Scopus Example shows CiteScore calculated for 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016 2015 B A CiteScore 2015 value B A = CiteScore A = Citations in one year to all documents published in previous 3 years B = All documents (all document types, same as A) published in 3 years CiteScore takes citations received in 2015 from documents published in the 3 preceding years Key differences with IF are the citation window (3 vs. 2 or 5) and that the denominator uses all document types as in the numerator (vs. all citations and only citable items)   Note: if a serial receives a citation in 2015 to something published in 2010, that citation will not count towards this Metric. Other metrics in the basket will count this citation though – not every metric needs to do everything! Note for reference: differences from the Impact Factor: 3-year citation window as opposed to 2 or 5 years. 2 or 5 years probably seemed OK when the Impact factor was created, 60 years ago, but much research has been done since then. Now we know that 2 years is unfair to the slower-moving fields, and 5 years is unfair to the faster-moving fields. In fact, 3 years has been identified by the bibliometrics research groups who calculate SNIP and SJR for us as the best compromise for a broad scope database, to incorporate a reasonable proportion of citations in all disciplines, while reflecting relatively recent data In Impact Factor, B = “citable items”, generally taken to be articles and reviews It’s not always entirely clear what a “citable item” is, and it can be open to interpretation, so the method is not completely transparent This inconsistency between numerator and denominator also makes the Impact Factor open to manipulation e.g. If a journal publishes a letter, this is often highly cited – the citations can be counted in the numerator, but the letter will not be counted in the denominator. An editor can publish an editorial citing publications in previous years, and these citations will be counted in the Impact Factor numerator even though it is not counted in the denominator. 20XX = Citations from 20XX | = Documents published in year 20XX

The main advantages of CiteScore Comprehensive Current Transparent Based on broad content coverage in Scopus All serials, not only journals Can be calculated for portfolios Available early in the year (May/June) Running values calculated quarterly New serials will have values after 1 year CiteScore and associated metrics available for free Underlying database available to interrogate Easy to calculate yourself

Metrics are only useful if they are integrated in the right products, when you need it: Scopus.com (free layer)

CiteScore, SJR, SNIP values In addition to CiteScore, we also have complementary metrics available via Scopus.com CiteScore, SJR, SNIP values

Document and citation counts More complementary metrics and full transparency on how CiteScore is calculated and the underlying data Document and citation counts % Cited Percentile rank

What to look out for in 2016 Conclude with Scopus content roadmap for 2016

2016 Scopus content roadmap 2015 OA Journal Indicator Q1 2016 Completion books project (120k) Q2 2016 Launch CiteScore Q3 2016 Retraction & errata workflow Funding data expansion Q4 2016 Cited reference expansion complete (11M) Article OA indicator Phase I Most of the items already discussed Operational and data quality improvements Re-evaluation of journal coverage Scopus Radar

Спасибо! Scopus info site: https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus Scopus blog: http://blog.scopus.com Webinar series: http://blog.scopus.com/webinars Twitter: www.twitter.com/scopus Facebook: www.facebook.com/elsevierscopus LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/scopus-an-eye-on-global-research YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/ScopusDotCom