Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 9, 2025

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
Published on: October 24, 2019
uCite: The union of nine large-scale public PubMed citation datasets with reliability filtering
Liri Fang1, Malik Oyewale Salami1, Griffin M Weber2
1School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.
Abstract:
There has been a recent push to make public, aggregate, and increase coverage of bibliographic citation data. Here we describe uCite, a citation dataset containing 564 million PubMed citation pairs aggregated from the following nine sources: PubMed Central, iCite, OpenCitations, Dimensions, Microsoft Academic Graph, Aminer, Semantic Scholar, Lens, and OpCitance. Of these, 51 million (9%) were labeled unreliable, as determined by patterns of source discrepancies explained by ambiguous metadata, crosswalk, and typographical errors, citing future publications, and multi-paper documents. Each source contributes to improved coverage and reliability, but varies dramatically in precision and recall, estimates of which are contrasted with the Web of Science and Scopus herein.
Related Concept Videos
Reliability and Validity
Improving Translational Accuracy
Sample Size Calculation
The sample size for the given experiment or sampling effort is fundamental to any study design. Sample size decides the number of...
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Confidence Intervals
A...

