Skip directly to content

Re-evaluation

Scopus Checks & Balances: Maintaining Quality Content on Scopus

on Mon, 06/12/2017 - 20:30

When a journal is first suggested for Scopus, it must undergo a rigorous evaluation and selection process to ensure it meets all the high-quality title selection criteria required for acceptance. However, journals must also demonstrate the ability to maintain their quality status year over year. This is where the Re-evaluation program comes in to play. Now in its second full year, this year’s annual title evaluation has been completed and journals that must undergo the full Re-evaluation process have been notified.  

The Re-evaluation process involves a multi-step and evaluation process used to determine whether or not it still meets all the quality criteria required to remain indexed by Scopus. You can read more details about how title Re-evaluation works in this earlier post.

The path for those titles discontinued as of January 1, 2017 began in 2015 during the annual title evaluation process — a process that all 22,000+ titles indexed by Scopus undergo.

Is a title indexed in Scopus? A reminder to check before you publish

on Mon, 10/24/2016 - 16:35

“Elsevier has also done extensive work addressing the issue of journals that have been suspended from its research publication database Scopus for inappropriate publishing behaviour – this is an ongoing task that ensures that the papers that we do measure really represent good quality research and those from suspended are not counted.”

Times Higher Education: World University Rankings blog: what’s new for 2016-2017?

This quote is a testament to the positive impact of the independent Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) working with the Scopus Content Product team to ensure that both quality standards and publication practice standards are in place for Scopus. As part of this effort, several initiatives have been adopted over the past two years helping to reinforce that content indexed in Scopus

represents “good quality research,” and that underperforming titles (as determined by the CSAB re-evaluation process), or titles

Re-evaluation: Maintaining high-quality content in Scopus

on Tue, 05/03/2016 - 02:29

Almost a year ago we announced the launch of the new Re-evaluation program for Scopus content. This program was created as an incentive for journals to maintain their high content quality. When a journal is originally suggested for Scopus, it must undergo a rigorous evaluation and selection process to ensure it meets all the high-quality title selection criteria required for acceptance into Scopus. However, journals must also demonstrate the ability to maintain their quality status year over year.

An additional focus for the first year of the re-evaluation program was to ensure all journals met the same baseline of quality standards. When Scopus launched in 2004, content originally came from different sources with different levels of evaluation.  Over time, evaluation criteria for new titles has evolved to become stricter and standardized.

Scopus launches annual journal re-evaluation process to maintain content quality

on Wed, 05/06/2015 - 08:26

Since Scopus’ launch in 2004, more than 56 million records have been added to the database. The content originally came from different sources (in-house databases like Embase, ScienceDirect and Compendex, the Scopus Title Suggestion Form and Medline) and has undergone different levels of Scopus content evaluation. This, together with the fact that the title evaluation criteria have evolved over time to become more strict, has led to a situation where some journals no longer meet the Scopus quality criteria.

As high content quality is very important to Scopus, and as an incentive for journals to maintain their high content quality, the title re-evaluation process has been implemented. Six quality metrics and benchmarks have been put in place which are the basis of the re-evaluation process, please find them in the below table. These criteria have been developed with the Scopus Content Selection & Advisory Board in conjunction with our Analytical Services team.

Journals not meeting the