The authors would like to thank the Deanship of Scientific Research for its fund to support the video production for this study. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Aseel Zabin, Department of English Language and Literature, The University of Jordan for English language review of this study.

NOTE: The following are search methods and an example search for each method is provided. Note that the part related specifically to bibliometric analysis is also supplied.
1. PubMed
<ol>
	<li>Choose Advanced Search from PubMed homepage (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed).</li>
	<li>Enter the desired search term in the search field. Choose the search terms from the medical subject heading (MeSH) database. The following example details how to assess research in &#34;cancer&#34;.
	<ol>
		<li>Open th...

<ol>
	<li>McGowan, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=PRESS+peer+review+of+electronic+search+strategies:+2015+guideline+statement.">PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement.</a> Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 75, 40-46 (2016).</li><li>Hood, W., Wilson, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+literature+of+bibliometrics,+scientometrics,+and+informetrics.">The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics.</a> Scientometrics. 52 (2), 291-314 (2001).</li><li>Bar-Ilan, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Citations+to+the+Introduction+to+infometrics+indexed+by+WOS,+Scopus+and+Google+Scholar.">Citations to the Introduction to infometrics indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar.</a> Scientometrics. 82 (3), 495-506 (2010).</li><li>Boudry, C., Baudouin, C., Mouriaux, F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=International+publication+trends+in+dry+eye+disease+research:+A+bibliometric+analysis.">International publication trends in dry eye disease research: A bibliometric analysis.</a> The Ocular Surface. 16 (1), 173-179 (2018).</li><li>Kulkarni, A. V. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Comparisons+of+citations+in+Web+of+Science,+Scopus,+and+Google+Scholar+for+articles+published+in+general+medical+journals.">Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals.</a> Journal of the American Medical Association. 302 (10), 1092-1096 (2009).</li><li>AlRyalat, S. A., Malkawi, L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=International+Collaboration+and+Openness+in+Jordanian+Research+Output:+A+10-year+Publications+Feedback.">International Collaboration and Openness in Jordanian Research Output: A 10-year Publications Feedback.</a> Publishing Research Quarterly. 34 (2), 265-274 (2018).</li><li>Falagas, M. E., Karavasiou, A. I., Bliziotis, I. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Estimates+of+global+research+productivity+in+virology.">Estimates of global research productivity in virology.</a> Journal of Medical Virology. 76 (2), 223-229 (2005).</li><li>Young, H. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=.">.</a> The ALA glossary of library and information science. , (1983).</li><li>Broadus, R. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Toward+a+definition+of+bibliometrics.">Toward a definition of bibliometrics.</a> Scientometrics. 12 (5-6), 373-379 (1987).</li><li>Falagas, M. E. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Comparison+of+PubMed,+Scopus,+web+of+science,+and+Google+scholar:+strengths+and+weaknesses.">Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses.</a> The FASEB Journal. 22 (2), 338-342 (2008).</li><li>Guz, A. N., Rushchitsky, J. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Scopus:+A+system+for+the+evaluation+of+scientific+journals.">Scopus: A system for the evaluation of scientific journals.</a> International Applied Mechanics. 45 (4), 351 (2009).</li><li>Jacso, P. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=As+we+may+search-comparison+of+major+features+of+the+Web+of+Science,+Scopus,+and+Google+Scholar+citation-based+and+citation-enhanced+databases.">As we may search-comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases.</a> CurrentScience. 89 (9), 1537-1547 (2005).</li><li>Li, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Citation+analysis:+Comparison+of+Web+of+Science,+Scopus,+Scifinder,+And+Google+Scholar.">Citation analysis: Comparison of Web of Science, Scopus, Scifinder, And Google Scholar.</a> Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries. 7 (3), 196-217 (2010).</li><li>Levine-Clark, M., Kraus, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Finding+chemistry+information+using+Google+Scholar:+a+comparison+with+Chemical+Abstracts+Service.">Finding chemistry information using Google Scholar: a comparison with Chemical Abstracts Service.</a> Science &amp; Technology Libraries. 27 (4), 3-17 (2007).</li><li>Gavel, Y., Iselid, L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Web+of+Science+and+Scopus:+a+journal+title+overlap+study.">Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study.</a> Online Information Review. 32 (1), 8-21 (2008).</li><li>Harzing, A. W., Alakangas, S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Google+Scholar,+Scopus+and+the+Web+of+Science:+a+longitudinal+and+cross-disciplinary+comparison.">Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison.</a> Scientometrics. 106 (2), 787-804 (2016).</li><li>Aghaei Chadegani, A., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=.">.</a> A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. , (2013).</li><li>Testa, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+Thomson+Reuters+journal+selection+process.">The Thomson Reuters journal selection process.</a> Transnational Corporations Review. 1 (4), 59-66 (2009).</li><li>Burnham, J. F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=.">.</a> Scopus database: a review. 3 (1), 1 (2006).</li><li>Small, H. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Visualizing+science+by+citation+mapping.">Visualizing science by citation mapping.</a> Journal of the American society for Information Science and Technology. 50 (9), 799-813 (1999).</li><li>Cobo, M. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Science+mapping+software+tools:+Review,+analysis,+and+cooperative+study+among+tools.">Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools.</a> Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62 (7), 1382-1402 (2011).</li><li>. Statistical Yearbook – 60th issue Available from: <a target="_blank" href="https://unstats.un.org/unsd/publications/statistical-yearbook/">https://unstats.un.org/unsd/publications/statistical-yearbook/</a> (2018)</li><li>Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+journal+coverage+of+Web+of+Science+and+Scopus:+a+comparative+analysis.">The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis.</a> Scientometrics. 106 (1), 213-228 (2016).</li></ol>

In this study, the steps through which PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases are used to perform a bibliometric analysis were provided. It was indicated that the friendliest and the easiest tool to use for bibliometric analysis services is Web of Science; however, its drawback is that its services are not available for free. PubMed is devoted for biomedical sciences and is affiliated with several other National Library of Medicine (NLM) tools that can help to optimize analysis of biomedical subjects. Medical Subje...

Classically, researchers have used literature databases to perform literature review for their studies1. Another use of these literature databases arose at the end of the 19th century, where researchers analyzed the body of literature, a use that has slowly grown since2. In the last few decades, digitizing literature and the formation of online literature databases provided an opportunity to researchers to analyze the body of literature and research performance easily and efficiently. An example would be analyzing the research performance for a document3, a subject4, a discipline5, a country6, or even a region in the world7. This type of analysis is known as bibliometric analysis. Heartsill Young defined bibliometric analysis as the use of statistical methods to analyze a body of literature to reveal historical development8. In other words, bibliometrics is the quantitative study of published units on the basis of citation and text analysis9.
Different databases are used to do bibliometric analysis and each database has different characteristics and can provide different services10. Currently, the most commonly used literature databases are the Web of Science and Scopus for almost all disciplines, both only available on a subscription basis11, and PubMed for biomedical and life sciences, a freely available database10. There is also Google Scholar, which might be an easy tool to handle, but it should not be used as a bibliometric analysis tool currently due to some deficiencies such as its unclear scope and coverage, its lack of citation analysis tools, and its inclusion of non-peer reviewed non-scientific contents12,13. Moreover, Google Scholar lacks the tools for performing advanced search and keyword optimization14.
Several previous studies have compared the features of the previously mentioned literature databases for literature review purposes3,5,10,12,13,15,16,17. However, in this study, the means by which PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases are used to perform a bibliometric analysis will be provided, and the pros and cons for each of them will be compared. Bibliometric analysis can be used to analyze the research output in almost any discipline, so the target audience would be any researcher who intends to analyze publication trends. An example of analyzing a publication trend in Jordan as a country will be presented using each database. Jordan was chosen because doing a bibliometric analysis for a country (in contrast to a subject) is not very straightforward. In addition, Jordan, specifically, is poorly studied in a bibliometric way as it can be both an author name and a country name. We explain how to overcome such a challenge in the search.

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:1267px;" width="1266">
	<tbody>
		<tr height="40">
			<td height="40" style="height:40px;width:216px;"></td>
			<td style="width:123px;">clarivate</td>
			<td style="width:344px;">N/A</td>
			<td style="width:584px;">Web of Science provider, where the access was provided by the subscription made by the University of Jordan.</td>
		</tr>
		<tr height="40">
			<td height="40" style="height:40px;"></td>
			<td>Elsevier</td>
			<td>N/A</td>
			<td>Scopus provider, where the access was provided by the subscription made by the University of Jordan.</td>
		</tr>
	</tbody>
</table>

comparing bibliometric analysis using pubmed, scopus, and web of science databases

Literature databases (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) differ in terms of their coverage, focus, and the tool they provide. PubMed focuses mainly on life sciences and biomedical disciplines, whereas Scopus and Web of Science are multidisciplinary. The protocol described in the current study was used to search for publications from Jordanian authors in the years 2013-2017. In this protocol, how to use each database to conduct this type of search is explained in detail. A Scopus search resulted in the highest number of documents (11,444 documents), followed by a Web of Science search (10,943 documents). PubMed resulted in a smaller number of documents due to its narrower scope and coverage (4,363 documents). The results also show a yearly trend in: (1) the number of publications, (2) the disciplines that have the most publications, (3) the countries of collaboration, and (4) the number of open access publications. In contrast, PubMed has a sophisticated keyword optimization service (i.e., Medical Subject Heading, or MeSH), while both Scopus and Web of Science provide search analysis tools that can produce representative figures. Finally, the features of each database are explained in detail and several indices that can be extracted using the search results are provided. This study provides a base for using literature databases for bibliometric analysis.

Results from PubMed search
A total of 4,363 documents were retrieved based on the search conducted in this study. Free full text was available for 1,767 documents (40.5%). In 2013, a total of 532 documents were published, 663 documents in 2014, 811 documents in 2015, 952 documents in 2016, and 1,405 documents in 2017.
The results reveal that 1,008 (23....

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases at JoVE.com

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Literature databases are commonly used to assess publications in a certain subject, discipline, country, or region of the world, a practice known as bibliometric analysis. The current protocol details how to use PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to do bibliometric analysis.

Literature databases (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) differ in terms of their coverage, focus, and the tool they provide. PubMed focuses mainly ...

This method can help answer key questions in the bibliometric analysis field about the available search databases and how to choose the most appropriate one. The main advantage of this protocol is that it provides a step-by-step approach to using different databases so that any researcher can perform a bibliometric analysis successfully. To analyze Jordanian research output during a five-year period between January 1st, 2013, and December 31st, 2017, using PubMed, open the Advanced Search form and enter Jordan as the search term, specifying Affiliation as the search field.To exclude all documents authored by a researcher named Jordan from an affiliated country that is not Jordan, type Jordan in another field and select the field type Author. Select the NOT operator as the connector between the two fields, and click Search. Specify the publication dates from between January 1st, 2013, to December 31st, 2017, in the results window, and select Journal Article and Review from article types.To analyze the Jordanian research output during a five-year period between January 1st, 2013, and December 31st, 2017, using Scopus, open the Scopus website and enter the appropriate Elsevier login information. Next, enter Jordan as the search term, and specify Affiliation country as the search field. Limit the search duration from 2013 to 2017.Note that from 2013 means from January 1st, 2013, and to 2017 means to December 31st, 2017. Then, limit the document type to Article or Review, and click Search. To analyze the Jordanian research output during a five-year period between January 1st, 2013, and December 31st, 2017, using Web of Science, open the Web of Science website and log in with the appropriate Web of Science account information.Enter Jordan in the search field, and specify Address. Identify the duration of the search as between 2013 and 2017, and click Search. Restrict the search using the Article and Review filters, and select to analyze the results saved in the search history now or later.Then, indicate whether the results should be displayed in a table, a visual tree map, or bars. Here, the yearly trends in Jordanian publication during the five-year 2013 to 2017 interval according to the Scopus search and the Web of Science search are shown. According to the country of collaboration in the Scopus search, the United States of America is the most common country with which Jordanian researchers collaborate, followed by Saudi Arabia and the United Kingdom.According to the Web of Science search, the United States is the most common country with which Jordanians collaborate, followed by France and Austria. Of the 10 most common disciplines within which Jordanians have published, medicine is the most common, followed by engineering and the social sciences according to the Scopus search. According to the Web of Science search, of the 10 most common disciplines within which Jordanians have published, engineering, mathematics, and computer sciences are the top three.While attempting this protocol, it's important to remember to select the appropriate database before starting your analysis. For example, PubMed is devoted to biomedical sciences only. Following this protocol and after downloading the results in CSV format, additional analysis methods like a bibliometric mapping can be performed for spatial representation of the results.After its development, this protocol paved the way for researchers in all fields to explore the research trends in their disciplines easily and efficiently.

comparing-bibliometric-analysis-using-pubmed-scopus-web-science

Research

JoVE Journal

Medicine

29.6K vistas.  University of Jordan. Este método puede ayudar a responder preguntas clave en el campo de análisis bibliométrico sobre las bases de datos de búsqueda disponibles y cómo elegir la más adecuada. La principal ventaja de este protocolo es que proporciona un enfoque paso a paso para utilizar diferentes bases de datos para que cualquier investigador pueda realizar un análisis bibliométrico con éxito. Para analizar la producción de investigación jordana durante un período de cinco años entre el 1 de enero de...