A comparison of different methods of identifying publications related to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Case study of SDG 13—Climate Action

IF 4.1 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
P. Purnell
{"title":"A comparison of different methods of identifying publications related to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: Case study of SDG 13—Climate Action","authors":"P. Purnell","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As sustainability becomes an increasing priority throughout global society, academic and research institutions are assessed on their contribution to relevant research publications. This study compares four methods of identifying research publications related to United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 13—Climate Action (SDG 13). The four methods (Elsevier, STRINGS, SIRIS, and Dimensions) have each developed search strings with the help of subject matter experts, which are then enhanced through distinct methods to produce a final set of publications. Our analysis showed that the methods produced comparable quantities of publications but with little overlap between them. We visualized some difference in topic focus between the methods and drew links with the search strategies used. Differences between publications retrieved are likely to come from subjective interpretation of the goals, keyword selection, operationalizing search strategies, AI enhancements, and selection of bibliographic database. Each of the elements warrants deeper investigation to understand their role in identifying SDG-related research. Before choosing any method to assess the research contribution to SDGs, end users of SDG data should carefully consider their interpretation of the goal and determine which of the available methods produces the closest data set. Meanwhile, data providers might customize their methods for varying interpretations of the SDGs.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"3 1","pages":"976-1002"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Science Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Abstract As sustainability becomes an increasing priority throughout global society, academic and research institutions are assessed on their contribution to relevant research publications. This study compares four methods of identifying research publications related to United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 13—Climate Action (SDG 13). The four methods (Elsevier, STRINGS, SIRIS, and Dimensions) have each developed search strings with the help of subject matter experts, which are then enhanced through distinct methods to produce a final set of publications. Our analysis showed that the methods produced comparable quantities of publications but with little overlap between them. We visualized some difference in topic focus between the methods and drew links with the search strategies used. Differences between publications retrieved are likely to come from subjective interpretation of the goals, keyword selection, operationalizing search strategies, AI enhancements, and selection of bibliographic database. Each of the elements warrants deeper investigation to understand their role in identifying SDG-related research. Before choosing any method to assess the research contribution to SDGs, end users of SDG data should carefully consider their interpretation of the goal and determine which of the available methods produces the closest data set. Meanwhile, data providers might customize their methods for varying interpretations of the SDGs.
识别与联合国可持续发展目标相关出版物的不同方法的比较:可持续发展目标13 -气候行动的案例研究
摘要随着可持续性在全球社会越来越受到重视,学术和研究机构将根据其对相关研究出版物的贡献进行评估。本研究比较了确定与联合国可持续发展目标13——气候行动(SDG 13)相关的研究出版物的四种方法。这四种方法(Elsevier、STRING、SIRIS和Dimensions)都在主题专家的帮助下开发了搜索字符串,然后通过不同的方法进行增强,以生成最终的出版物集。我们的分析表明,这些方法产生了数量相当的出版物,但它们之间几乎没有重叠。我们可视化了两种方法在主题焦点方面的一些差异,并绘制了与所使用的搜索策略的链接。检索到的出版物之间的差异可能来自对目标的主观解释、关键词选择、操作搜索策略、人工智能增强和书目数据库的选择。每一个要素都需要更深入的调查,以了解它们在确定可持续发展目标相关研究中的作用。在选择任何方法来评估对可持续发展目标的研究贡献之前,可持续发展目标数据的最终用户应仔细考虑他们对目标的解释,并确定哪种可用方法产生的数据集最接近。同时,数据提供者可能会根据对可持续发展目标的不同解释定制他们的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quantitative Science Studies
Quantitative Science Studies INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
46
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信