Reference Coverage Analysis of OpenAlex compared to Web of Science and Scopus
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
OpenAlex is a promising open source of scholarly metadata, and competitor to established proprietary sources, such as the Web of Science and Scopus. As OpenAlex provides its data freely and openly, it permits researchers to perform bibliometric studies that can be reproduced in the community without licensing barriers. However, as OpenAlex is a rapidly evolving source and the data contained within is expanding and also quickly changing, the question naturally arises as to the trustworthiness of its data. In this report, we will study the reference coverage and selected metadata within each database and compare them with each other to help address this open question in bibliometrics. In our large-scale study, we demonstrate that, when restricted to a cleaned dataset of 16.8 million recent publications shared by all three databases, OpenAlex has average source reference numbers and internal coverage rates comparable to both Web of Science and Scopus. We further analyse the metadata in OpenAlex, the Web of Science and Scopus by journal, finding a similarity in the distribution of source reference counts in the Web of Science and Scopus as compared to OpenAlex. We also demonstrate that the comparison of other core metadata covered by OpenAlex shows mixed results when broken down by journal, capturing more ORCID identifiers, fewer abstracts and a similar number of Open Access status indicators per article when compared to both the Web of Science and Scopus.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 7.
10 papers.
- 2025Citation Parsing and Analysis with Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Why can't Epidemiology be automated (yet)?cited by 1
- 2025Remembering Unequally: Global and Disciplinary Bias in LLM Reconstruction of Scholarly Coauthor Listscited by 0
- 2026Construction of a Battery Research Knowledge Graph using a Global Open Catalogcited by 0
- 2026A Large-Scale, Cross-Disciplinary Corpus of Systematic Reviewscited by 0
- 2026Smaller, Younger, and More Impactful: How AI-Assisted Writing Transforms Research Teamscited by 0
- 2026Research Entity Extraction and Topic Detection from UKRI Grant Proposalscited by 0
- 2026From Static Bibliometrics to Dynamic Knowledge Graphs: An LLM-Powered Framework for Modernizing Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) Analyticscited by 0
- 2026Towards Nexus-Score: Metadata Gaps Limit Scholarly AI Attributioncited by 0
- 2026AI in Science: Early Insightscited by 0
- 2026AI in Science: Early Insights15 Sep 2026
- 2026From Static Bibliometrics to Dynamic Knowledge Graphs: An LLM-Powered Framework for Modernizing Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) Analytics23 Jul 2026
- 2026Towards Nexus-Score: Metadata Gaps Limit Scholarly AI Attribution14 Jul 2026
- 2026Research Entity Extraction and Topic Detection from UKRI Grant Proposals29 Jun 2026
- 2026Smaller, Younger, and More Impactful: How AI-Assisted Writing Transforms Research Teams24 Apr 2026
- 2026A Large-Scale, Cross-Disciplinary Corpus of Systematic Reviews23 Apr 2026
- 2026Construction of a Battery Research Knowledge Graph using a Global Open Catalog22 Apr 2026
- 2025Remembering Unequally: Global and Disciplinary Bias in LLM Reconstruction of Scholarly Coauthor Lists1 Nov 2025
- 2025Why can't Epidemiology be automated (yet)?21 Jul 2025
- 2025Citation Parsing and Analysis with Language Models21 May 2025