A relevance ranking method for citation-based search results
- 631 Downloads
A growing number of researchers are exploring the use of citation relationships such as direct citation, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation for information retrieval in scientific databases and digital libraries. In this paper, I propose a method of ranking the relevance of citation-based search results to a set of key, or seed, papers by measuring the number of citation relationships they share with those key papers. I tested the method against 23 published systematic reviews and found that the method retrieved 87% of the studies included in these reviews. The relevance ranking approach identified a subset of the citation search results that comprised 27% of the total documents retrieved by the method, and 7% of the documents retrieved by these reviews, but that contained 75% of the studies included in these reviews. Additional testing suggested that the method may be less appropriate for reviews that combine literature in ways that are not reflected in the literature itself. These results suggest that this ranking method could be useful in a range of information retrieval contexts.
KeywordsBibliometrics Information retrieval Citation analysis Systematic reviews
Thanks to Cindy Clark of the NIH Library for reviewing and editing a previous draft of this manuscript. Thanks also to two anonymous reviewers whose comments improved the manuscript.
- Carevic, Z., & Schaer, P. (2014). On the connection between citation-based and topical relevance ranking: results of a pretest using I search. Paper presented at the proceedings of the first workshop on bibliometric-enhanced information retrieval, Amsterdam, 13 April.Google Scholar
- Cribbin, T. (2014). Augmenting citation chain aggregation with article maps. Paper presented at the proceedings of the first workshop on knowledge maps and information retrieval, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Heck, T., & Schaer, P. (2013). Performing informetric analysis on information retrieval test collections: Preliminary experiments in the physics domain. arXiv:1306.1743.
- Horsley, T., Dingwall, O., & Sampson, M. (2011). Checking reference lists to find additional studies for systematic reviews. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (8), MR000026. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000026.pub2.
- Linder, S. K., Kamath, G. R., Pratt, G. F., Saraykar, S. S., & Volk, R. J. (2015). Citation searches are more sensitive than keyword searches to identify studies using specific measurement instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68(4), 412–417. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- National Research Council. (2011). Finding what works in health care: Standards for systematic reviews. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Pao, M. L., & Worthen, D. B. (1989). Retrieval effectiveness by semantic and citation searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(4), 226–235. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(198907)40:4<226:aid-asi2>3.0.co;2-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sci2 Team (2009). Science of science (Sci2) tool. Indiana University and SciTech strategies.Google Scholar