2019
DOI: 10.1080/1941126x.2018.1562601
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MathSciNet: A comparative analysis of American Mathematical Society and EBSCO platforms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The numbers of documents retrieved were 22, 16, and 98, respectively. EBSCO includes more libraries, involving papers published in various schools, journals, and periodicals worldwide [ 39 ], resulting in more retrieval results. Afterward, the retrieved documents were screened following the PRISMA criteria [ 40 , 41 ], and the results are illustrated in Figure 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The numbers of documents retrieved were 22, 16, and 98, respectively. EBSCO includes more libraries, involving papers published in various schools, journals, and periodicals worldwide [ 39 ], resulting in more retrieval results. Afterward, the retrieved documents were screened following the PRISMA criteria [ 40 , 41 ], and the results are illustrated in Figure 1 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is room for growth. Not all databases perform as poorly (e.g., MathSciNet on the EBSCO and American Mathematical Society platforms; Bussmann et al, 2019).…”
Section: Implications For Citation Searchersmentioning
confidence: 99%