https://hdl.handle.net/10481/2670 Fri, 17 Apr 2026 02:54:26 GMT 2026-04-17T02:54:26Z https://hdl.handle.net/10481/101049 Informe bibliométrico sobre la producción científica del profesor Juan Manuel Corchado Martín Martín, Alberto; Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio Versión revisada y actualizada del informe solicitado por el Comité Español de Ética de la Investigación. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/101049 https://hdl.handle.net/10481/73116 SPECIAL TRACK: Present and future of research metadata: where do we want to go from here? Martín Martín, Alberto; Vargas Quesada, Benjamín; Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Zaida; Cobo, Manuel Jesús To steer the scientific system towards specific goals, it is first necessary to develop an effective understanding of all phases and aspects of the research workflow. Research metadata, as the collective record of traces that are generated when scientific activities take place, serves as evidence of these activities. Therefore, the availability of authoritative research metadata is essential for science-related decision-making at various levels. In the past, large-scale research metadata collections mostly dealt with items in the public record, such as bibliographic metadata about academic publications. There used to be few of these large-scale metadata collections, and they were often provided by commercial actors, those which invested the necessary resources to compile and process disperse public information with the goal of turning it into usable services. As the capabilities of available technologies increase, each day more sectors of the scientific system are becoming aware of how their activities could benefit from updating their workflows, a process often referred to as digital transformation. Thus, a plethora of tools and standards are being developed to streamline processes, increase interoperability, and in general overcome the limitations of the paper era. This is having a large effect in the quantity and quality of research metadata that is now being recorded. A clear example of the above is the case of bibliographic metadata. Currently, an increasing number of organizations, spurred by the decreasing barriers to collecting and processing large amounts of bibliographic metadata, are already providing services and datasets that rival the offerings of the traditional commercial providers. Some of these new datasets, provided under open licenses that allow unrestricted reuse and redistribution, have boosted innovation by allowing the development of downstream applications that rely on these metadata collections. However, as scientific activities in general and scientific communication in particular are increasingly moving to the digital space, traditional bibliographic metadata is no longer the only kind of research metadata that is being collected and processed at a large scale to inform decisions. Social network platforms now capture a portion of academic-related conversations and other kinds of interactions. Processes such as peer review that were previously carried out behind closed doors are now being opened, generating their own public trace. Publishing platforms are implementing increasingly sophisticated methods to track and mine user actions for their benefit. All these recent developments call for a discussion on the role of research metadata in the scientific system going forward. This discussion should be open to a large variety of stakeholders, including data providers, scientometricians, academic librarians, higher education institutions, policy managers, and developers of downstream applications. The topics of the contributions to this special track can include: • Analyses of the suitability of research metadata sources for specific use cases • Sustainability and governance of research metadata • Innovations in research metadata • Downstream applications of open research metadata • Surveillance through research metadata Contributions to this special track would be open to everyone interested and peer-reviewed. The format of the session would be 15-20 minutes per presentation, with time for questions after each presentation. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/73116 https://hdl.handle.net/10481/66233 Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations Martín Martín, Alberto; Thelwall, Mike; Orduna-Malea, Enrique; Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio New sources of citation data have recently become available, such as Microsoft Academic, Dimensions, and the OpenCitations Index of CrossRef open DOI-to-DOI citations (COCI). Although these have been compared to the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS), Scopus, or Google Scholar, there is no systematic evidence of their differences across subject categories. In response, this paper investigates 3,073,351 citations found by these six data sources to 2,515 English-language highly-cited documents published in 2006 from 252 subject categories, expanding and updating the largest previous study. Google Scholar found 88% of all citations, many of which were not found by the other sources, and nearly all citations found by the remaining sources (89–94%). A similar pattern held within most subject categories. Microsoft Academic is the second largest overall (60% of all citations), including 82% of Scopus citations and 86% of WoS citations. In most categories, Microsoft Academic found more citations than Scopus and WoS (182 and 223 subject categories, respectively), but had coverage gaps in some areas, such as Physics and some Humanities categories. After Scopus, Dimensions is fourth largest (54% of all citations), including 84% of Scopus citations and 88% of WoS citations. It found more citations than Scopus in 36 categories, more than WoS in 185, and displays some coverage gaps, especially in the Humanities. Following WoS, COCI is the smallest, with 28% of all citations. Google Scholar is still the most comprehensive source. In many subject categories Microsoft Academic and Dimensions are good alternatives to Scopus and WoS in terms of coverage. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/66233 https://hdl.handle.net/10481/66003 Modelo de servicio semántico de difusión selectiva de información (DSI) para bibliotecas digitales Peis Redondo, Eduardo; Herrera Viedma, Enrique; Morales del Castillo, José Manuel Se presentan las bases teóricas y metodológicas para el desarrollo de un modelo de servicio multiagente de DSI para bibliotecas digitales especializadas que aplica tecnologías de web semántica para gestionar más eficazmente la información, mejorar los procesos de comunicación entre agentes y usuarios, y agilizar el acceso a recursos de interés. Para ello se utilizan canales rss a modo de boletines de novedades a partir de los cuales se generan alertas bibliográficas personalizadas. El servicio dispone de un módulo de gestión de canales rss y otro de push de información. En el primero los documentos son representados en forma de ítems en los canales rss y se les asignan materias semiautomáticamente, equiparando sus palabras clave asociadas con los términos de un tesauro en formato SKOS Core. En el módulo de push de información se generan las alertas personalizadas de acuerdo a las preferencias definidas en los perfiles de los usuarios; We present the theoretical and methodological foundations for the development of a multi-agent SDI service model for specialized digital libraries, applying semantic web technologies that permit more efficient information management, improving agent-user communication processes and facilitating accurate access to relevant resources. To do this, rss feeds are used as “current awareness bulletins” to generate personalized bibliographic alerts. The SDI service model has an rss feeds management module and an information push module. In the first module, resources are represented as rss feed items and are also semi-automatically assigned subject terms by matching their associated keywords against the terms of a SKOS Core format thesaurus. In the information push module, bibliographic alerts are customized according to the preferences defined on users’ profiles. Este trabajo se enmarca dentro del Proyecto de Excelencia Sainfoweb 0602 de la Junta de Andalucía y del proyecto Fuzzy-Ling (TIN2007-61079) del Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/66003 https://hdl.handle.net/10481/60872 La viralidad de la ciencia defectuosa: el contagioso impacto mediático de un preprint en bioRxiv sobre el coronavirus y sus efectos en la comunicación científica Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio; Martín Martín, Alberto ESPAÑOL: El 31 de enero un trabajo de investigación no revisado se publicó en el repositorio bioRxiv afirmando haber encontrado "misteriosas similitudes" entre el virus SARS-CoV-2 y el virus del SIDA (HIV-1), sugiriendo que estas coincidencias no "eran de naturaleza fortuita". Este caso ha demostrado ser un buen ejemplo de cómo un desarrollo reciente en la comunicación científica, como el uso creciente de la publicación de documentos de trabajos de biomedicina no revisados en repositorios, puede influir en las ya acaloradas conversaciones en redes sociales de masas sobre el brote de COVID-19. El trabajo recibió inmediatamente fuertes críticas de expertos y fue retirado voluntariamente por los autores dos días después de su publicación inicial. Hasta la fecha, el trabajo ha recibido dos citas según Google Scholar: una de un artículo que explora el impacto de las preimpresiones en esta crisis, y otra de un artículo que refuta sus afirmaciones. Mientras tanto una docena de otros estudios sobre el COVID-19 publicados en similares fechas ya han recibido más de un centenar de citas. En contraste con la clara respuesta de la comunidad científica (rechazo rápido, seguido de su silencioso eco en la literatura posterior), este informe se convirtió, hasta el 19 de marzo de 2020, en el trabajo de investigación más compartido de todos los tiempos en las redes sociales según los datos de altmetric.com. Esta plataforma ha registrado más de 22,000 tweets y más de 50 noticias que mencionan este estudio. Este caso muestra que incluso cuando la comunidad científica muestra una alta inmunidad a la información inexacta, la sociedad en general no está equipada con los mismos mecanismos de defensa, especialmente cuando la información se presenta con apariencia científica. La creciente tendencia hacia la ciencia abierta trae muchos potenciales beneficios, pero también desafíos como la necesidad de aumentar la cultura científica de la población en general. Se comentan los cambios que se están produciendo en la comunicación científica como consecuencia de esta crisis de salud global: velocidad en la publicación de resultados de investigación a través de los repositorios, eficacia de la revisión por pares en abierto, significado de las nuevas métricas de impacto, viralidad de la ciencia defectuosa en la población y necesidad de una vacunación masiva a través de una alfabetización informativa.; ENGLISH: On January 31th, an unrevised report published in the preprint server bioRxiv claimed to have found "uncanny similarities" between the new SARS-CoV-2 virus and HIV-1, suggesting that these coincidences were "unlikely to be fortuitous in nature". This case has proved to be a good example of how a recent development in scientific communication, such as the growing use of preprints in biomedicine, is able to influence the already heated conversations in mass social media about the COVID-19 outbreak. The paper immediately received heavy criticism from experts and was voluntarily withdrawn by the authors two days after its initial publication. To this date, the paper has received two citations according to Google Scholar: one from a paper that explores the impact of preprints in this crisis, and one from an article that refutes its claims. For reference, a dozen of other COVID-19 studies published around the same time have already received well over a hundred citations. In striking contrast to the clear response from the scientific community (swift rejection, followed by the silent treatment in the subsequent literature), this report was, until March 19th 2020, the most shared research work of all time on social media according to data from altmetric.com. This platform has recorded over 22,000 tweets and over 50 news pieces mentioning this study. This case shows that even when a community of experts displays a high immunity to inaccurate information, the society at large is not necessarily equipped with the same defence mechanisms, especially when information is presented with the veneer of science. The growing trend of doing science in the open brings many potential benefits, but also challenges like the need to increase the scientific culture of the general population. We discuss the changes that are taking place in scientific communication as a result of this global health crisis: speed in the publication of research results through repositories, effectiveness of open peer review, meaning of new impact metrics (altmetrics), virality of faulty science in the population, and the need for mass vaccination through information literacy. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/60872