Abstract

Open access implementation seems to have reached a plateau in many countries, and as a result the push for open science frequently places more emphasis on research data management. There are, however, whole areas around the open communication of research outputs which can still benefit from significant improvement. One of the most obvious is a better codification of the funding information in the bibliographic records for publications in repositories. While the emphasis has traditionally been to collect as many full-text records as possible about institutional and subject-based repositories, the typical way the funding information for publications is being coded into metadata records remains very poor, or is absent altogether. This paper argues that this is a key area for research impact assessment and improvement. It’s also argued that such an improvement needs solid housekeeping on the research funders’ side, possibly based on new and evolving standards. A few different approaches to capture and display the funding information in metadata records in an optimal fashion are discussed.

Abstract

In the most recent edition of Google Scholar Metrics (2012-2016) there was an abrupt drop in the number of Spanish scientific journals; the total was 1,101 in the 2011-2015 edition but fell to 599 in the 2012-2016 edition. We conducted an analysis by discipline in order to find which journals were affected. After considering several hypotheses to explain this phenomenon, we conclude the main cause was the sudden disappearance of the Spanish bibliographic database Dialnet from Google Scholar. Because Dialnet is the only online source that provides information about an important number of Spanish journals (which do not have any other online exposure), being dropped by Google Scholar meant that all these Spanish journals, which had previously been indexed in Google Scholar Metrics, became suddenly invisible.

Abstract

In recent years, the UPF has implemented several initiatives to disseminate the scientific output of the university’s teaching and research personnel: UPF digital repository (e-Repositori), scientific output portal (PPC), and the provision of tools and recommendations to standardize an author’s name and affiliation, evaluate scholarly journals, improve the curriculum vitae, etc. The library’s role in these initiatives is discussed, along with the increasing importance of these activities within the scope of academic libraries.