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