Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data

@article{Herzog2020DimensionsBD,
  title={Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data},
  author={Christian Herzog and Daniel Hook and Stacy Konkiel},
  journal={Quantitative Science Studies},
  year={2020},
  volume={1},
  pages={387-395}
}
Until recently, comprehensive scientometrics data has been made available only in siloed, subscription-based tools that are inaccessible to researchers who lack institutional support and resources. As a result of limited data access, research evaluation practices have focused upon basic indicators that only take publications and their citation rates into account. This has blocked innovation on many fronts. Dimensions is a database that links and contextualizes different research information… 
View on MIT Press
mitpressjournals.org
61 Citations
Highly Influential Citations
7
Background Citations
15
Methods Citations
12

61 Citations

Connecting Scientometrics: Dimensions as a Route to Broadening Context for Analyses
TLDR
Connecting Dimensions and World Bank data on Google BigQuery to study international collaboration between countries of different economic classification and bringing broader world data into the hands of practitioners who use scientometrics as a tool can extend their capabilities.
Scaling Scientometrics: Dimensions on Google BigQuery as an Infrastructure for Large-Scale Analysis
TLDR
A novel visualisation technique is introduced and used as a means to explore the potential for scaling scientometrics by democratising both access to data and compute capacity using the cloud.
Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic
TLDR
A large-scale comparison of five multidisciplinary bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic highlights the importance of combining a comprehensive coverage of the scientific literature with a flexible set of filters for making selections of the literature.
Comparative Analysis of the Bibliographic Data Sources Dimensions and Scopus: An Approach at the Country and Institutional Levels
TLDR
It is found that close to half of all documents in Dimensions are not associated with any country of affiliation while the proportion of documents without this data in Scopus is much lower, which affects the possibilities that Dimensions can offer as instruments for carrying out bibliometric analyses at the country and institutional level.
A map of Digital Humanities research across bibliographic data sources
TLDR
Citations from and to DH publications showed strong connections between DH and research in Computer Science, Linguistics, Psychology, and Pedagogical & Educational Research, which suggests a reciprocal interest between the two disciplines.
The effect of data sources on the measurement of open access: A comparison of Dimensions and the Web of Science
With the growing number of open access (OA) mandates, the accurate measurement of OA publishing is an important policy issue. Existing studies have provided estimates of the prevalence of OA…
Using Conventional Bibliographic Databases for Social Science Research: Web of Science and Scopus are not the Only Options
Although large citation databases such as Web of Science and Scopus are widely used in bibliometric research, they have several disadvantages, including limited availability, poor coverage of books…
Funding Covid-19 research: Insights from an exploratory analysis using open data infrastructures
TLDR
The open availability of funding data in Crossref is studied, focusing on funding data for publications that report research related to Covid-19, and a comparison with the funding data available in two proprietary bibliometric databases: Scopus and Web of Science is presented.
Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today's Academic World
TLDR
An all-inclusive description of the two main bibliographic DBs by gathering the findings that are presented in the most recent literature and information provided by the owners of the DBs at one place is provided.
Scopus 1900–2020: Growth in articles, abstracts, countries, fields, and journals
TLDR
Assessing changes in the magnitude of the coverage of a major citation index, Scopus, over 121 years from 1900 shows sustained exponential growth, except for dips during both world wars, and with increased growth after 2004.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 16 REFERENCES
Dimensions: re-discovering the ecosystem of scientific information
TLDR
It is concluded that Dimensions is an alternative for carrying out citation studies, being able to rival Scopus (Greater coverage and free of charge) and with Google Scholar (greater functionalities for the treatment and data export).
Dimensions: A Competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?
Measuring the Impact of the International Relationships of the Andalusian Universities Using Dimensions Database
TLDR
Results show that the average number of citations per paper increases as the author collaboration networks increases geographically.
Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?
TLDR
Overall, this first small-scale study suggests that, when compared to Scopus and the Web of Science, Crossref and Dimensions have a similar or better coverage for both publications and citations, but a substantively lower coverage than Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic.
Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation
TLDR
The techniques used to create the Dimensions dataset, a new database that focussed on a different set of problems to other scholarly search systems, holds a representation of an n-partite graph associated with the heterogeneous research objects.
Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level
TLDR
An improved method is described that makes novel use of the co-citation network of each article to field-normalize the number of citations it has received, and provides an alternative to the invalid practice of using Journal Impact Factors to identify influential papers.
Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity
TLDR
Using the set of my own publications, whether they were reliably and validly assigned to fields is investigated, and the results put in question the reliability and validity of the scheme.
What is an information professional
It is proposed that information profesionals apply their special knowledge about information and information technology with on basic purpose in mind: to get the right information from the right…
Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Web of Science, Scopus, Dimensions, and Crossref
A Guide to the Dimensions Data Approach
...
...