REVIEW 1 cited by
Scholarly outputs of EU Research Funding Programs: Understanding differences between datasets of publications reported by grant holders and OpenAIRE Research Graph in H2020
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Linking research results to grants is an essential prerequisite for an effective monitoring and evaluation of funding programs. For the EU research funding programs, there are multiple datasets linking scholarly publications to the individual grants, including both open data and those from commercial bibliometric databases. In this paper, we systematically compare openly available data from two data sources: on one hand those reported by the Grant holders (and subsequently published by the European Commission on open data portal) and those from the OpenAIRE Research Graph which collect data from multiple sources. We describe the dataflow leading to their creation and assess the quality of data by validating, on sample basis, the link <project, publications>. We report that, by and large, OpenAIRE Research Graph offers a more complete dataset of scholarly outputs of from EU Research funding programs. We identify also possible improvements and make recommendations on how they can be addressed.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Analysing the coverage of the University of Bologna's bibliographic and citation metadata in OpenCitations collections
About 36% of the 402,505 records in the University of Bologna's IRIS system could be matched into OpenCitations, but citations per record there (35.3) are close to Scopus (36.0) and Web of Science (34.7).
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.