InfluScience and EC3 metrics, spin-off of this research group, has published the report The “Big Three” of Scientific Information: A Comparative Bibliometric Review of Web of Science, Scopus and OpenAlex, now available on Zenodo
The document, authored by Daniel Torres-Salinas and Wenceslao Arroyo-Machado, provides a systematic analysis of the three leading international bibliographic databases—Web of Science, Scopus, and OpenAlex—with particular attention to their role in research evaluation. The study combines a review of specialized literature with a comparative bibliometric analysis covering the period 2015–2024, examining dimensions such as:
-
- Document coverage
-
- Publication typologies
-
- Thematic distribution
-
- Linguistic diversity
-
- Degree of overlap and metadata quality
This methodological approach has made it possible to identify structural differences that are highly relevant for decision-making in science policy and institutional evaluation processes. For example, the findings show that Web of Science and Scopus share approximately 90% of their content, whereas OpenAlex concentrates a substantial volume of exclusive records. This implies that relying on a single source may significantly alter the corpus analyzed and, consequently, the evaluation outcomes.
This particular feature is highlighted among the report’s ten executive points: these divergences directly affect the robustness of normalized indicators and suggest the need to distinguish between broad exploratory analyses and formal evaluations with consequences for funding, accreditation, or academic career progression.
As a final recommendation, the authors emphasize the complementary use of these sources, underscoring the importance of balancing comprehensiveness, data quality, and transparency within scientific information systems.