Google Scholar vs. Scopus vs. Web of Science

A recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar produce quantitatively and qualitatively different citation counts for articles published in 3 general medical journals.

The results would seem to indicate that Google Scholar and Scopus have a broader global range than Web of Science. Some of the other differences between the databases may be due to differences in article type classification.

The Physicians' Desk Reference morphs to PDR 2.0 ?

The Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR) found in every US physician's office, clinic and hospital is merging with the Health Care Notification Network (HCNN), a network that delivers FDA-required drug alerts to physicians and other prescribers online. See link.

Thomson sold PDR to Lee Equity, a NY-based investment company. Thomson put PDR on the block in 2008, citing double digit fall in revenue as big pharmas focus shifted from print to online, allowing its more agile competitors, such as ePocrates and Medscape, to grab market share and surge ahead.

HCNN is run by the iHealth Alliance, a not-for-profit organization whose mission is to protect the interests of patients and providers, as healthcare increasingly moves online. The HCNN is funded by manufacturers that use the network to deliver patient safety alerts.

The new product offering will consist of an alerting service aimed at all prescribers and health care practitioners. This business model gives substantial opportunities for revenue development, compared to the relatively static web-presence of PDR and some of its European equivalents such as eMC.

Adding data to the open access mix

An editorial in the current issue of Nature urges research funding agencies to recognize that preservation and access to digital data are central to their mission, and cites Genebank as an example of just how valuable legacy data sets can be. The article goes on to urge individual disciplines to support this activity be providing students with education programs which include information management, describing this as a discipline that encompasses the entire life cycle of data, from acquisition to storage. Data management, it says, is one of the "foundations of knowledge".

Ganesha Associates would agree whole-heartedly with this vision, but would argue for a selective approach when it comes to selecting priorities for data archiving. The curation of molecular data is a relatively simple task by comparison with other types of data, such as images and medical records. So the cost/benefit ratio will vary across data types.

The Nature article poses the question of responsibility for data storage and suggests that university libraries might be up to the task. But in many cases, we think, an international approach is required. Could this be a role for STM publishers?