Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals.

By A. Kulkarni, B. Aziz, I. Shams, J. Busse. Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), 2009

803 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: History and Philosophy of Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/badc843ef1ed2d6df8ae1996ea98fd12f3e8e2be

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In History and Philosophy of Science

1. Ludo Waltman
2. Julian P. T. Higgins

In Statistics and Probability

1. Ludo Waltman
2. Julian P. T. Higgins
3. Ian R. White
4. Georgia Salanti
5. Paul T. von Hippel
6. John P. A. Ioannidis
7. Raminta Pranckute
8. S. Thompson

Citations in the corpus

• Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration (2011, methodology): “…in the number of records indexed in each citation index and in the methods used to index records, and there is evidence that these differences affect the number of citations which are identified when citation searching (Kulkarni et al 2009, Wright et al 2014, Rogers et al 2016, Rogers et al 2020).”
• A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, background): “It is also observed in the literature that citation counts tend to be higher in Scopus than in WoS (e.g., Haddow & Genoni, 2010; Kulkarni et al., 2009; TorresSalinas et al., 2009).”