Enrichment process for title submission in STEP

Transcription

1 Enrichment process for title submission in STEP Shareef Bhailal Product Manager Scopus Title Evaluation Platform March 8 th, 5 th Editor workshop for Scopus indexing Thai Pilot Project Ambassador Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand

2 2 AGENDA Scopus content evaluation facts Scopus title suggestion full walkthrough Enrichment process by the Scopus content evaluation team

3 3 Warm-up How many title suggestions have we received so far? What percentage of suggested titles meet the minimum Scopus criteria (%)?

4 Jan-10 Mar-10 May-10 Jul-10 Sep-10 Nov-10 Jan-11 Mar-11 May-11 Jul-11 Sep-11 Nov-11 Jan-12 Mar-12 May-12 Jul-12 Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15 May-15 Jul-15 Sep-15 Nov-15 Jan-16 Mar-16 May-16 Jul-16 Sep-16 Nov-16 Jan-17 Mar-17 May-17 Jul-17 Sep-17 4 New title suggestions per month (Jan 2010 Oct 2017) Undetermined Not for review For review : 3,884 titles suggested, of which 1,394 for review (36% success rate, 116 eligible titles per month) 2012: 3,291 titles suggested, of which 1,311 for review (40% success rate, 109 eligible titles per month) 2013: 3,094 titles suggested, of which 963 for review (31% success rate, 81 eligible titles per month) 2014: 2,755 titles suggested, of which 1,157 for review (42% success rate, 97 eligible titles per month) 2015: 2,929 titles suggested, of which 1,544 for freview (52% sucess rate, 129 eligible titles per month) 2016: 3,426 titles suggested 2017YTD: 2,748 titles suggested

5 5 Warm-up Thailand ranks #53 on the list of submitted titles (4 th largest of ASEAN countries: Indonesia, Singapore & Malaysia are the top 3 countries) We receive about 6 Thai titles per year for Scopus evaluation Acceptance rate of Standard Thai titles: approx. 23%

6 6 100% Less than half of the reviewed titles are selected for Scopus coverage In total 7,229 titles reviewed ( ) of which 3,310 (45%) accepted for Scopus Title review results from top 20 countries with most titles reviewed in the last 6 years: 90% % 70% 60% % 40% % 20% 10% Thailand 23% %. Accepted Rejected

7 7 ECSAC Thailand statistics Remember the 23% acceptance rate for titles published in Thailand? After collaboration with ECSAC-Thailand, 10 titles were recommended for Scopus review as part of the first batch of Thai pilot titles After final review by the Content Selection & Advisory board, 10 out of 10 have been accepted for Scopus. 100% acceptance rate for Thai pilot journals

8 Scopus Title Evaluation Process 8

9 9 Scopus Title Evaluation Process: Suggestion 2 1

10 Scopus Title Evaluation Process: Validation & Enrichment 10

11 Scopus Title Evaluation Process: Review & Decision 11

12 12 Involvement of the Local Board* Pre-selection Local board review

13 Enrichment process by STEP team 13

14 14 Enrichment process by STEP team We capture up to 244 different information fields for each submitted title Let s focus on some important ones

15 15 Peer review information Input from publisher is in general trusted by the evaluation team. Please be accurate as this is critical information for the review process. There is an increasing need for more peer-review evidence Heads-up: will be introduced soon, be prepared!

16 16 Clarity of abstracts Input from publisher is thoroughly validated by the evaluation team Abstract quality will be checked: Use of language (grammar, typos, machine translations) Visibility/readability Good summary/representation of full article

17 17 Citations The following indicators are critical in order for the evaluation team to calculate citation performance: Start year of the journal History of title Average number of articles published per year If any of the above information is either inaccurate, it will have consequences for the citation calculation. Let me explain

18 18 Citations Citation performance of a title is one of the (if not the) most important qualitative indicator when it comes to reviewing titles for possible Scopus inclusion. The evaluation team runs a search query in Scopus, based on the information provided on the suggestion/publisher form. Hence, as mentioned before, providing us with accurate information is critical! This citation information is passed on to the external Scopus Content Selection & Advisory Board (CSAB), including an recommended score (e.g. well cited, fairly cited)

19 19 Citations This is how the evaluation team runs citation search query for titles under Scopus evaluation. 1. Since the journal is not yet in Scopus, we are using the Scopus Secondary documents feature. A secondary document is a document that has been extracted from a Scopus document reference list but is not available directly in the Scopus database since it is not indexed by Scopus. 2. We use wildcards in our title search to not miss out on any citations from the journal that is under evaluation 3. We take into account parallel language title names and/or predecessor titles. 4. Example: French Journal of Social Psychiatry 2001 present French Journal of Psychiatry / Revue Francaise de la Psychiatrie

20 20 Citations French Journal of Social Psychiatry 2001 present French Journal of Psychiatry / Revue Francaise de la Psychiatrie We convert the title using wildcards: Fre* J* Soc* Psy* / Fre* J* Psy* / Rev* Fra* Psy* This is the final search query in Scopus: (SRCTITLE(Fre* J* Soc* Psy*) AND PUBYEAR AFT 1997 AND PUBYEAR BEF 2002) OR ((SRCTITLE(Fre* J* Psy*) OR SRCTITLE(Rev* Fra* Psy*)) AND PUBYEAR AFT 2000)

21 21 Citations On the results page, we will only select titles that actually belong to the journal under evaluation

22 22 Citations On the results page, we will only select titles that actually belong to the journal under evaluation

23 23 Citations After doing that, we will have list of articles that have been cited by other publications in Scopus. Let s say 150 articles from the journal under evaluation have been cited by journals indexed in Scopus. Cited articles (#of publication years * # articles per year) *45 = 33% citedness

24 24 Citations The citation calculation is now completed. However another essential step needs to be taken. 33% is a relative number. We need more context to determine the actual value of this percentage. This is where we use benchmarks.

25 25 Citations Together with CWTS Leiden (Netherlands) a benchmarking document was created. This document analyzed citation patterns in Scopus, taking into account the journal Age and Subject Area. Based on this data we can determine whether a citation percentage of 33% is high or low. This determined scoring is shared with the CSAB to help them make decisions for journals under evaluation.

26 26 Main handling editor standing Important to provide us with the main handling editor (e.g. Editor in chief, co-editor in chief, managing editor etc.). Not the most influential (e.g. editor with the highest H-index) that is on the advisory board and therefore may not be managing the journal) 1 main handling editor is required but if available please provide up to 3 handling editor profiles. Online professional information is not mandatory but strongly advised (online resume)

27 27 Main handling editor standing Scopus profiles of these main handling editors will be shared with the CSAB. These profiles include the h-index, nr. Of published document and citation performance of this editor Together with the online professional information provided the CSAB will determine the editor standing (from very poor standing till extremely well standing )

28 28 Website quality A functional website is of utmost importance Transparency (no hidden info), readability (well structured, English language option) and comprehensiveness are key A good English website is increasingly being used by the CSAB as one of primary sources for information during evaluation

29 29 Main take-aways Familiarize yourself with the suggestion/publisher enrichment form. Take the time to fill it in accurately. This will have impact! Be aware of the review criteria used by the CSAB: A good English website is increasingly being used by the CSAB as one of the primary sources of information during evaluation. Make sure it s comprehensive and transparent.

30 30 Thanks all! Scopus info site: Scopus blog: Webinar series: Twitter: Facebook: LinkedIn: YouTube: