Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation - Review of the Literature

By Gali Halevi, Henk F. Moed, Judit Bar-Ilan. J. Informetrics, 2017

435 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/daa957c767c501f0ba4af3cea699674f5fde389e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Information Systems

1. Neal R Haddaway
2. Raminta Pranckute
3. Michael Gusenbauer

In Statistics and Probability

1. Raminta Pranckute
2. Neal R Haddaway
3. Michael Gusenbauer
4. M. Hiebl

Citations in the corpus

• Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources (2020, methodology): “33,50,95 Our methods allowed a comprehensive review of many different search systems.”
• Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today's Academic World (2021, background): “Due to the almost coinciding emergence of Scopus and GS in 2004, many of these comparisons also included GS [31,44] and, later, other additional data sources.”