There is a newer version of the record available.

Published May 26, 2024 | Version v1
Publication Open

PROCI Peer Review OpenCitations Index: a methodology

Creators

  • 1. ROR icon University of Bologna

Contributors

  • 1. ROR icon University of Bologna

Description

The purpose of this study is to create a citation index that includes typed citations where a peer review (citing entity) reviews a publication (cited entity) following the OpenCitations Data Model (OCDM).
The study involves analyzing and manipulating the 2023 Crossref data dump. Crossref is a non-profit organization that facilitates the exchange of scholarly metadata. The outcome of the study is the development of a software capable of extracting typed entities identified as peer reviews from Crossref dataset and integrating additional information about the reviewed entities from the same dataset. This software generates CSVs and a Turtle file that conform to the OCDM.
Based on PROCI results, it is determined that the journal receiving the highest number of peer reviews is PeerJ. Furthermore, it is found that approximately 5,689 out of 348,463 of Crossref’s peer reviews are present in Meta (1.6% ), while 70,260 are the
Publications in Meta over the 77,660 found in Crossref ( 90,5%).
This study enhances scholarly metadata and deepens the understanding of research impact by proposing a novel citation index that captures peer review interactions.
This study was run strictly following Open Science principles, and, as such, our research outcomes are fully reproducible.

Files

Proci-paper.pdf

Files (2.3 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:951959a34a1bd4b1a6108b93e58f1520
2.3 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is supplemented by
10.5281/zenodo.11305414 (DOI)

Dates

Available
2024-05-26

Software

Repository URL
https://github.com/open-sci/2023-2024-harkonnen-code
Programming language
Python
Development Status
Active

References

  • Auer, S., Oelen, A., Haris, M., Stocker, M., D'Souza, J., Farfar, K. E., . . . Jaradeh, M. Y. (2020a, November). Improving Access to Scientific Literature with Knowledge Graphs. Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis, 44 (3), 516–529. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https:// 17 www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/bfp-2020-2042/html doi: 10.1515/ bfp-2020-2042
  • Auer, S., Oelen, A., Haris, M., Stocker, M., D'Souza, J., Farfar, K. E., . . . Jaradeh, M. Y. (2020b, November). Improving Access to Scientific Literature with Knowledge Graphs. Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis, 44 (3), 516–529. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https:// www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/bfp-2020-2042/html doi: 10.1515/ bfp-2020-2042
  • Baldwin, M. (2015, 9 20). Credibility, peer review, and nature, 1945-1990. Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, 69 (3), 337–352. doi: 10.1098/rsnr.2015.0029
  • Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked Data - The Story So Far. Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst., 5 , 1–22.
  • Cioffi, A., Coppini, S., Massari, A., Moretti, A., Peroni, S., Santini, C., & Shahidzadeh Asadi, N. (2022a, June). Identifying and correcting invalid citations due to DOI errors in Crossref data. Scientometrics, 127 (6), 3593–3612. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04367-w doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04367-w
  • Cioffi, A., Coppini, S., Massari, A., Moretti, A., Peroni, S., Santini, C., & Shahidzadeh Asadi, N. (2022b, June). Identifying and correcting invalid citations due to DOI errors in Crossref data. Scientometrics, 127 (6), 3593–3612. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04367-w doi: 10.1007/s11192-022-04367-w
  • Daquino, M., Massari, A., Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2023). The OpenCitations Data Model. figshare. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https://figshare.com/articles/ online resource/Metadata for the OpenCitations Corpus/3443876/8 (Artwork Size: 894791 Bytes Pages: 894791 Bytes) doi: 10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.3443876.V8
  • Fyfe, A., Coate, K., Curry, S., Lawson, S., Moxham, N., & Røstvik, C. M. (2017). Untangling academic publishing: A history of the relationship between commercial interests, academic prestige and the circulation of research. Zenodo. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.546100 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.546100
  • Giambattista, C. D. (2023, November). A new revolutionary workflow for a unified collection of citations: say hello to the opencitations index. OpenCitations blog. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.58079/sjfl (Retrieved May 25, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.58079/sjfl) doi: 10.58079/sjfl
  • Heibi, I., Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2019, November). Software review: COCI, the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations. Scientometrics, 121 (2), 1213–1228. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03217-6 doi: 10.1007/s11192-019-03217-6
  • Hendricks, G., Tkaczyk, D., Lin, J., & Feeney, P. (2020, February). Crossref: The sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (1), 414–427. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/ 1/1/414-427/15577 doi: 10.1162/qss a 00022
  • Massari, A., Mariani, F., Heibi, I., Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2023). OpenCitations Meta. arXiv. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.16191 (Version Number: 1) doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2306.16191
  • Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2019, 1). Open citation identifier: Definition. Retrieved from https://figshare.com/articles/journal contribution/ Open Citation Identifier Definition/7127816 doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.7127816 .v2
  • Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2020, February). OpenCitations, an infrastructure organization for open scholarship. Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (1), 428–444. Retrieved 2024-05- 22, from https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/1/1/428-444/15580 doi: 10.1162/ qss a 00023
  • Peroni, S., Shotton, D. M., & Vitali, F. (2016a). A document-inspired way for tracking changes of rdf data. In Drift-a-lod@ekaw. Retrieved from https://api .semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:365731
  • Peroni, S., Shotton, D. M., & Vitali, F. (2016b). Freedom for bibliographic references: Opencitations arise. In A. L. Gentile, C. d'Amato, Z. Zhang, & H. Paulheim (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on linked data for information extraction co-located with 15th international semantic web conference (ISWC 2016), kobe, japan, october 18, 2016 (Vol. 1699, pp. 32–43). CEUR-WS.org. Retrieved from https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1699/paper-05.pdf
  • Rooyen, V. (2010). Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 341 . Retrieved from https://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c5729 doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5729
  • Ross-Hellauer, T. (2017, April). What is open peer review? a systematic review. F1000Research, 6 , 588. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.11369.2
  • Saqr, M., Fors, U., & Tedre, M. (2017, July). How learning analytics can early predict under-achieving students in a blended medical education course. Medical Teacher, 39 (7), 757–767. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1309376 (Publisher: Taylor & Francis) doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1309376
  • Sommerville, I. (2004). Software Engineering (7th ed.). Retrieved from https://www .worldcat.org/it/title/56760442
  • Tennant, J. P. (2018a, 08). The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 365 (19), fny204. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fny204 doi: 10.1093/femsle/fny204
  • Tennant, J. P. (2018b, October). The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 365 (19), fny204. Retrieved 2024-05-22, from https://doi.org/10.1093/ femsle/fny204 doi: 10.1093/femsle/fny204
  • Tennant, J. P., Dugan, J. M., Graziotin, D., et al. (2017). A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review [version 3; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research, 6 , 1151. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research .12037.3 doi: 10.12688/f1000research.12037.3
  • Waltman, L., & Polka, J. (n.d.). Making sense of preprints by adding context – The Publish Your Reviews initiative [Blog] . Retrieved from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/ 2022/07/07/making-sense-of-preprints-by-adding-context-the-publish-your -reviews-initiative/
  • Waltman, . P. J., L. (2022, July 7). Making sense of preprints by adding context – the publish your reviews initiative. Retrieved from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/ impactofsocialsciences/2022/07/07/making-sense-of-preprints-by-adding -context-the-publish-your-reviews-initiative/ (Blog post, accessed: May 25, 2024)

This site uses cookies. Find out more on how we use cookies