The letter to the Editor refers to the controversial research evaluation practice in Ukraine and which is based on counting the number of publications in journals included in selected citation databases, for instance Scopus. I have selected fifty journals in which Ukrainian scholars have written the largest number of articles and reviews for 2015-2019 (Scopus data). I found that 78% of these titles are journals of Ukrainian publishers, or Ukrainian translated journals. Accordingly, current Ukrainian evaluation practice leads to the higher chances of state recognition and funding being received mainly by institutions whose journals are already presented in citation databases, without assessing the scientific impact of research outputs.

No abstract

Our study is one of the first examples of multidimensional and longitudinal disciplinary analysis at the national level based on Crossref data. We present a large-scale quantitative analysis of Ukrainian economic research. This study is not yet another example of research aimed at ranking of local journals, authors or institutions, but rather exploring general tendencies that can be compared to other countries or regions. We study different aspects of Ukrainian economic research output. In particular, the collaborative nature, geographic landscape and some peculiarities of citation statistics are investigated. We have found that Ukrainian economic research is characterized by a comparably small share of co-authored publications, however, it demonstrates the tendency towards more collaborative output. Based on our analysis, we discuss specific and universal features of Ukrainian economic research. The importance of supporting various initiatives aimed at enriching open scholarly metadata is considered. A comprehensive and high-quality meta description of publications is probably the shortest path to a better understanding of national trends, especially for non-English speaking countries. The results of our analysis can be used to better understand Ukrainian economic research and support research policy decisions.

Faced with a prolonged economic crisis, Ukrainian research institutes are under pressure as a direct result of limited funding. This has also had a negative impact on the functionality of librarians who have seen limitations in acquisitions. Despite the economic difficulties, Ukrainian academic librarians are trying to offer their users specialized services that involve active librarian mediation in the process of preparing and disseminating the results of scientific work of users, in particular in the detection and struggle with pseudoscientific journals. In this paper, based on a survey of librarians from leading Ukrainian universities, we studied for the first time, the main information resources and tools used by Ukrainian experts to test scientific journals for their further recommendation to library users as reliable channels for disseminating research results. These are tools and resources such as Scopus, Web of Science, Beall's black lists, the DOAJ, Think. Check Submit, and The Norwegian Register. We describe the benefits and limitations that may arise in the work of Ukrainian academic librarians when each of the identified resources is used. Modern times of reformation in Ukrainian science has opened up new opportunities for Ukrainian academic librarians. As a result, if they are able to successfully implement such services, they can regain a prominent place in the scientific life of institutions and on the global academic platform.

No abstract